Revision as of 19:37, 7 April 2015 editPenbat (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users58,229 edits →I strongly resent your COI smear here← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:10, 20 April 2024 edit undoBilby (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators40,067 edits rv - let's let things beTag: Manual revert | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{banned user|by=the ]|link=]}} | |||
{{editnotice | |||
| header = Hi, welcome to my talk page! | |||
| headerstyle = font-size: 150%; color: #9900FF; font-family: 'Copperplate Gothic Light' | |||
| text = | |||
*'''If you came here to discuss article content, please post at the article Talk page.''' That is where discussions about content belong, so that everybody watching the article can participate, and so the discussion becomes part of the page's historical record, and is easy to find. | |||
*'''Please''' <span class="plainlinks"></span> '''to leave a new message'''.}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
|archiveheader = {{aan}} | |archiveheader = {{aan}} | ||
|maxarchivesize = |
|maxarchivesize = 200K | ||
|counter = |
|counter = 29 | ||
|minthreadsleft = |
|minthreadsleft = 0 | ||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | ||
|algo = old( |
|algo = old(30d) | ||
|archive = User talk:Jytdog/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = User talk:Jytdog/Archive %(counter)d | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Archives |auto= short|search= yes |
{{Archives |auto= short|search= yes |bot= MiszaBot |age=30 |collapsible=yes}} | ||
] | |||
== That's all folks == | |||
'''Welcome!''' | |||
<!-- ] 23:17, 30 November 2028 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1859239047}} | |||
So... I made a very bad error in judgement, and called a person who had added raw advocacy content to WP, who is clearly deeply passionate about the topic. | |||
The call went very badly. I shouldn't have called them, I shouldn't have allowed it to become an argument, and I shouldn't have ended the call the way I did. | |||
Hello, Jytdog, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for ]. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] and ] | |||
*] (using the ] if you wish) | |||
*] | |||
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome --> --] (]) 18:42, 20 April 2010 (UTC) | |||
In the past, I violated the OUTING policy by posting off-WP information here. That was also a terrible error in judgement. | |||
==Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion== | |||
] | |||
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at ] regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on ]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:27, 9 March 2015</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
I also have generally been pretty aggressive in trying to maintain high quality in our content, and this has caused some people here to dislike and distrust me, and per the last ANI about me, there is weariness in the community with me. | |||
In the current situation, there is rampant speculation about a three minute conversation and about my intentions. There is some fierce debate about the boundaries of the harassment policy. There are a lot of angry people. Probably hours have been spent, that could have been better spent elsewhere actually building the encyclopedia. | |||
== Talk:Naturopathy == | |||
Hi Jytdog<br /> | |||
Please be advised that when I commented at ], I have also added 3 indents to your comment to maintain the 'flow' of the discussion with {{u|Young Naturopath 01}}. ({{diff2|651147361|'''Diff here'''}}). I have also noted on the page where added. Regards, ] ] <sup>]</sup> 04:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
It looks like this will become a case, which will mean many more hours. The outcome of that case if pretty foregone, in my view. I see no good reason to put everybody through more of this. | |||
Hey Jytdog, | |||
Thanks for the welcome. I've been a wikipedia member for a while, but have so far made only minor edits, and often forget to log on. Thanks for the resources. It should help me with navigating my way around formatting. | |||
All I've done so far on the naturopathy page is flag the issues. As I'm in the middle of an assignment at the moment I won't have time to do more for a bit, but I hope to add some well referenced updates to the Australian Regulations section to start with, and we'll see how it goes from there. I see you may well have some education in the life sciences so hopefully we can at least speak the same language.] (]) 03:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:sorry for telling you what you already knew - thanks for being gracious about it! I do hope we can have good, productive, PAG based discussions. :) ] (]) 03:35, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Why did you close my disscusion? --] (]) 21:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::please read the ] and follow them. article Talk pages are for discussing article content and sources. They are not a forum. ], which is what I wrote on the hat and in my edit note, and again here, is part of TPG. ] (]) 21:22, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
So, I am out of here. I am scrambling my WP password and deleting my gmail account and "Jytdog" will cease to do anything, anywhere. If you see any other Jytdog doing stuff in the future, anywhere, '''it is not me.''' (And no, I will be not be coming back here as a sock.) I urge Arbcom to do just do a motion and indef or site ban me. | |||
Great work on the reference review. I'll see if I can dig up a few new ones where needed sometime and I'll make a proposed reference reading list on Nat talk when the gov report comes out on 1 April. I feel more relaxed about this now I've decided to take a break from the editing.] (]) 03:34, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
I just want to say '''thanks''' to everybody I have worked with, and I wish you all, and our beautiful project, the best. ] (]) 16:52, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
== response to Petrarchan at ANI == | |||
:Dammit man. -] ] 17:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
Response to . | |||
::That is not a foregone conclusion. Do as you will, but the case will surely go on anyway. --] (]) 17:03, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::Very sad to hear it. Like Tryptofish says, Arbcom is not a foregone conclusion, but you should do what you think best. ] (]) 17:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::The frustrations for Arbcom and you are understandable, but the overall mission of the project – and your obvious love of and value to it – should not be hastily dismissed. Give yourself a 2 week break, then re-evaluate... and return with a fresh outlook. --] (]) 17:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::::Sad to see this. Best wishes,] (]) 17:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::::+1 to what Zefr said. ] (]) 17:44, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Another +1 here. Nobody is irreplaceable but Misplaced Pages would be much worse off without you, Jytdog. All best wishes to you, whatever you decide to do. -- '']'' <small>] ]</small> 3:17 am, 4 December 2018, last Tuesday (3 days ago) (UTC+9) | |||
:::::::And another +1 here.--] (]) 10:41, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
{{u|Jytdog}} The whole episode is a storm in a teacup. I am sad to see you going dude. The place will be worse without you. Take care mate. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 18:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I understand your motivations in doing this, but I would encourage you not to burn all the bridges as such. By all means, take a wikibreak as Zefr suggests (even a longer one, if you want), feel free even to sit out the arbcom case, but perhaps reconsider your account abandonment. I can speak from personal experience that it is easy to mess up in pushing the boundaries of best practices at this website. That's part of the design, and pushing out people who are effective in their designs is also a prototypical feature of societies that are run by the kinds of ] that Misplaced Pages employs (see ]). Taking time away from this website in such scenarios can provide much needed perspective (it has for me, certainly), but I think your general outlook on what is or is not appropriate here with respect to the way we report on various claims and promotions is one that is needed. Crucially,], and it would be great to have you back after some time spent in the wilderness. ] (]) 18:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::I'll echo this and Zefr at the least Jytdog. I've gone the route you outlined of scrambling password, deleting email, etc. when deciding to quite a particular haunt of the internet. Sometimes it really is better to go cold turkey, but I'd suggest in this case go up to everything but deleting the email until a time later. That still gives you the option to come back after a month or whatever, but I always felt like I had more closure waiting a bit for that final step even in the cases when I really did decide to be done. | |||
::That being said, remember that ArbCom does not have the authority to give out a site ban in this particular instance yet as they are still bound by ] policy. The ''most'' that can be done is an indef topic-ban on anything relating to real-life identities of Misplaced Pages editors. Anything beyond that would violate blocking policy in part considering you already made it clear you weren't going to be doing this again (before the initial block). A site-ban/indef-block can't comply with policy yet unless a likelihood for disruption outside the COI/real-life identity area appeared likely or that you violated such a topic ban at a later date. It can only be applied when it's clear an editor is going to have issues no matter the topic they go into. This doesn't need to be the end of the road, but I can understand just wanting to be done with all the drama too. ] (]) 20:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
:Above () I mentioned you in the following context: "I've attracted some haters. For the most part these are folks really committed to an anti-GMO POV.". | |||
:::Just fyi, they ''do'' have the authority. And they are a lot more likely to pull the trigger if they do it by motion. --] (]) 20:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::Diffs supporting that you are a "hater" of me (which I note that you didn't question, so i guess we agree on that), just two difs: (which is really mind-blowing to me in the depth of your conspiratorial thinking about me) and of course your | |||
::::Just to be clear, I'm saying they only have the authority in the situations I outlined above. There's nothing preventative about a site-ban ''unless'' a case can be made that staying out of real life identity areas wouldn't be enough to prevent disruption. Basically, one can argue at most the ] has been depleted for that area. My opinion is such a topic-ban should be done as while Jytdog does have some troubles in the area for all the good they've done, the mix of community tension with COI, etc. along with a history of pot-stirring by some problematic editors still hounding Jytdog just makes the area a tough fit for Jytdog. The site level is going outside the bounds of policy at this time though. That's as much as I'm going to comment here about that though. My point is that if Jytdog decides to come back after a good break, they still have tons of areas they should be able to edit. ] (]) 21:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::Diffs of your opposition to GMOs: | |||
:::::You've just been proven wrong at the case page. --] (]) 21:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::First. We have content throughout WP on the scientific consensus, that eating currently approved foods from GM plants is as safe as eating food from conventional sources (which does not say, and never has said, that "GMOs are completely safe and no one worth their salt has any doubt" (as you described it in your "case study" linked above.) You have been fighting against this statement for a long time now, and have characterized that statement as an "ad", and have stated that "You want truth about GMO's (or natural healing, big oil, etc.)? Misplaced Pages is NOT the place to find it". (in the | |||
:::::I'm staying out of the general issue, but I'd like to point out that someone saying they will do something is not the same thing as someone actually doing it. Otherwise there arbcom would have little to do, and we as a community will issue few cbans etc. Plenty of people say they will do something, whether or not they actually do so is a different matter. And this isn't simply about sincerity. I'm sure quite a few people who make such promises are sincere when they make the promise, but still fail to uphold it abjectly. Again I'm staying out of the general issue, since I have no idea of the evidence as I haven't looked, and it's unlikely I would ever fully know anyway since some of it is likely to be private so I'm not saying this applies to Jytdog. I'm simply pointing out it's entirely possible a block would have been preventative not simply because Jytdog may have made problems in other areas but because they may have been unable to actually do what they said they would do or were asked to do. ] (]) 19:38, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::in (middle edit) where you summoned groupuscule to a discussion at the ] article, calling groupuscule "The editor who knows about this subject" (for readers, groupuscule created a long document deconstructing (and i mean that in the lit crit sense) the content and sources supporting the scientific consensus statement, which was considered and rejected in . | |||
::::::Just to clarify, the context I was talking about was that the block was not preventative compared to a topic ban, which ''did'' work when it was in effect and should of been reinstated in terms of ] before a full site ban. That's all moot now though unless Jytdog decides to come back though. ] (]) 19:41, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::probably the best single dif of your POV is , where you make your "GMOs are dangerous" POV clear. | |||
::]. | |||
:there you go ] (]) 14:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
*Well that ended badly :-( Take care. You did great work well you were here. Hope you will rejoin us one day. ] (] · ] · ]) 19:34, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I have done plenty of stupid things here too and I really do need you to keep me honest ;-) So get back on the horse! But seriously, please take a well deserved break and reflect. Reiterating Doc James, I hope you will rejoin us. ] (]) 19:55, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
:::I'm hiding under my tinfoil blanket. -] (]) 11:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
* I consider this a serious loss for the project. I guess I understand why you would want to leave, but I nevertheless hope that you'll reconsider at some time in the future -- even though there will be some hurdles you'd have to get over if the current motion passes. In the meantime, I wish you all the best. ] (]) 21:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* We have had a lot of different interactions, but I believe you made a mistake and it was not malicious, and I think You should rethink this. Misplaced Pages would be worse off without you. - ] ] 21:49, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I can't imagine what you're going through, and how bad you must feel. This is a community here, and I know you feel community with a lot of the people, whether you've met them or not, and that will be a further loss. You must feel like crap, and that's understandable. You didn't do the worst thing in the world, and the project still needs you. Decisions made at the peak of emotion aren't always the best ones. You get to decide how to lead your life so the deicsion is yours, but I hope you will take the two-week break or whatever feels right to you, and then revisit the situation. You would be welcomed back. Feels like there's a Jytdog-shaped hole in the Misplaced Pages jigsaw puzzle of a community right now, and there's only one person that can fill it. Enjoy your break, and hope to see you back here. ] (]) 22:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::I've been feeling like I want to say something more, and I've been wavering over exactly what to say, but Mathglot just said it better than I could have. --] (]) 23:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*🙁 Mathglot puts it very well. I don't like to see a Jytdog-shaped hole in Misplaced Pages either. ] | ] 23:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC). | |||
* It's sad that your huge passion for the project has resulted in this. Thanks for your tireless efforts in making the project neutral. If it's goodbye here, then enjoy your free time until you find your next passion! ] (]) 23:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* We've had interesting discussions on how to work with people, particularly those with a COI. While some of your approaches have been questionable, I for one have never had any doubts concerning your commitment to ensuring neutrality and quality of content on WP. This is a great loss for the 'pedia. --] (]) 00:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*''']'''--] (]) 00:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I am so sorry to see this. What's done is done, but you may consider making a clean start in a few months, and I hope you would be welcomed. Take care. ] (]) 01:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Thanks for your edits on the alternative medicine related articles. You should take a break and come back here in the future under a new name. ] (]) 02:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Your positive work is appreciated. best regards, —tim /// ] (]) 03:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* ] and ] are not always true, and I've been considering creating a ] counter essay. You do so much for Misplaced Pages that others don't do. And even if someone else takes up the mantle, there will be some quality aspects missing because every editor is unique in one way or another. I thank you for all of the work you've done for this site, and for often being there for me. I hope to see your return in the future. ] (]) 07:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
**] I have been thinking the same thing. Our core community is irreplaceable. ] (] · ] · ]) 17:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* You've made a significant contribution: the quality of our content is much improved across many topics (especially medical) as the result of your hard work. ] (]) 07:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I will miss you and your thoughtful thoughts. ] is one of my favourite essays here. You were there for Misplaced Pages at many times when we needed you. May the next chapter of your volunteer life be interesting and happy for you, wherever you may go. ] (] <nowiki>|</nowiki> ]) 07:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I am sad to learn of your departure, I thank you for all your contributions, and I wish you the very best going forward. ] ] 08:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I was trying to compose a comment at ArbCom and could not really get past, "Well, fuck." Please know that I have learned a very great deal from working with you, knowledge and skills I will continue to carry forward, as I know many others do as well; in that sense and many more, your impact on the site will be long-lasting. I hope you don't mind my saying, I also really admire you as a person, because over time, I saw how willing you were to reconsider and make real, hard-earned adjustments to your approach. That level of character is not something you see every day. I know this episode must be a painful ending, but I recognize in your choice for how to conclude it what I know you do too--an only-increasing thoughtfulness about how you can best contribute to the project and avoid becoming more disruptive than constructive, even if what that requires in a given moment is hardly the thing I know you'd prefer. I have no doubt you'll find another good use for your talent in the near-term, and if eventually it's your judgment that your return would serve the project, well, I'll look forward to it. I will be wishing you the very, very best in the meantime. ] (]) 08:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::<small>Just to say, I was edit-conflicted by four other well-wishers trying to post this! You will very much be missed. ] (]) 08:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)</small> | |||
*I want to add myself to the list of people who are grateful for all the good work you've done here and to tell you that you'll be missed. I hope you do come back some day, in some form. ] (]) 11:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Thank you for all of your help over the years. I'm not sure which side of the fence you might fall on so let me just say "Live long and prosper" and "May the Force be with you". -- ] (]) 12:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Awful news. You're one of the few people on this website I hold in extremely high regard.]<sup>]</sup> 14:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Please, don't pull the trigger just yet. By all means give yourself a break if you need it. Do something else for a while. Ignore this place and allow the drama processes to grind through as they will. Then reconsider if you could simply accept some boundaries and then resume making your hugely constructive contributions within those boundaries. This will be a lesser place without you.] <small>]</small> 18:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Just another voice in the crowd. The volume and quality of the work you've done here speaks for itself; you've been inspirational. Plus what Mathglot said. ]] 18:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* The project is weaker, and will quickly become even weaker, without you. ] (]) 22:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* You have dedicated a lot of your time to improve the project and made thousands of valuable contributions. But yes, the word "aggressive" that you used above to describe your behaviour is unfortunately consistent with my observations and experience, and as I noticed many complaints at ANI. Your attitude drove me away from wikiediting for months on more than one occassion. You are a very knowledgeable person with amazing breadth of knowledge. I encourage you not to leave the project for good – rather, consider taking an extended wikibreak, and then come back to the project, possibly with a friendlier, more supportive and more tolerant attitude. Best, — ] ] 00:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Do you hear the support. All is voluntary here and the decision is yours. ] (]) 02:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Thank you for your countless valuable contributions and your obvious dedication to improve this project. I can't really comment about the actual issue, but I agree with others' thoughts about a Wikibreak as a possible chance to reflect on stuff. ] (]) 02:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Thanks for all you've done. You have improved the encyclopedia greatly. Your presence will be missed and I join the chorus suggesting a break and return in a while. Best. ] (]) 03:51, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Thanks for all your work and help. I hope you'll be back. Take care. --] (]) 04:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Thanks for all the help, guidance, and outright inspiration you have offered us Jytdog. I wish you the best in your future endeavors, whatever they may be. ] (]) 04:54, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* Doc James and Mathglot summed it up. Unfortunate that things turned out this way. Thank you for your contributions to the project. You have stated that you plan never to return, so I wish you the best in your future endeavors. --] <sup>]</sup> 16:23, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* :( – ] <small>(])</small> 16:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I'm not sure whether you'll (ever) see this but thanks for helping me over the last few year improving and updating many of the articles covering pharm and biotechs, it's been great to work with you, whenever our paths crossed. Like the tribute wall above, you'll be missed and I hope that there are editors out there who can take up your torch in ensuring that the quality of WP does not degrade and become filled with promotional bluster! I wish you the best outside of this project and hope one day you will somehow be able to return! ] (]) 18:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I obviously played a pretty significant part in this per my comments at ] and the case request, but for what it's worth I'm sad to see this result. I was expecting that if this proceeded to a full Arbcom case that cooler heads would prevail, and that in light of your significant contributions to the project and with everything on the table, a reasonable solution (sanction, probably) could have been crafted which would have still allowed you to be part of this community. It seems that's not to be. Outside of the noticeboards I think our only significant interaction was in working on changes to the ] some years ago clarifying the scope of community ban discussions (approximately and ), which I have always appreciated as one of the most rational and constructive discussions I have ever been involved with in almost a decade here even though we did not initially agree. I very rarely write notes to departing editors, but I share the view that regardless of this recent incident, Misplaced Pages will certainly be worse for your absence. Of course this project is voluntary, it wears down the best of us at times, and we must all do what is right for ourselves in the end. Whatever you decide, take care and best wishes. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 20:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* I am sad to see things turned out this way for you, maybe, one day, you'll be back! Enjoy your retirement! ''''']''''' (]) 20:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I'm not a prolific pedian by any stretch but I have always appreciated your stalwart work regarding keeping bullshit off of here. You were a dam against the never ending tide of anti-science filth that tried to infect our medical articles and I'm afraid that they will now be worse without you. It's a shame that Arbcom didn't avoid getting sucked up with the lynch mob. Be well. ] (]) 21:34, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Thank you for all of your contributions here, Although we've never interacted I've always seen you around, Anyway I hope one day you come back but in the meantime take care and I wish you all the best, Take care, –]<sup>]</sup> 22:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Rather selfishly I will miss your help on my ]; the work you put into improving ] made the whole thing worthwhile. I sincerely hope that your post-wiki world is filled with minimal drama and maximum happiness. Best, -- ]<sup>]</sup> 23:53, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
* In looking back on a conversation we had in 2013, I realized that I haven't encountered someone who has been willing to completely engage in such a detailed discussion in a long, long time. As someone who strongly believes in raising the ] bar on Misplaced Pages, I have mixed opinions about the entire situation, but I know you had good intentions and I felt like your tone and approach improved over time. Hope to see you back someday. ] | (] - ]) 02:18, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Well, Misplaced Pages just lost a valuable content contributor and one of its few safeguards against COI POV. The idea that this situation came about as a result of the community's response to a single well-intended but ill-advised phone call is just completely fucking asinine. Anyway, thanks for everything you did here Jytdog. I'm sorry to see you go. ] (]) 02:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*You have done excellent work here in developing our approach to COI--because of the effort you have put into it, we will be able to continue, and I for one, feel a specific need to try to compensate for your absence--especially because I was unable to prevent the arb com result, a I have been in other cases where I arb com proved susceptible to excessive self-reinforcing behavior. ''']''' (]) 06:09, 6 December 2018 (UTC) -- and see below for what I will try to do in practice. ''']''' (]) 08:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I have created and added myself to the category, ]. ] (]) 17:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Just noticed this, having being absent. I'm not wading through the history of the case but my sentiments are similar to those expressed by Bishonen above, who in turn agrees with Mathglot. - ] (]) 00:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Just saw this. No idea if you're still reading, but if so, know that you'll definitely be missed around here. Thank you for your guidance, your empathy, your generosity and your counsel over the years. ] (]) 20:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Thank you for the hard high quality work you have done, the vast majority of which will persist for years to come in our articles. You messed up, admitted it in your above post, accepted the outcome, that is good. Take a holiday to a tropical island with bikini clad women walking the beaches and chill out sipping a cocktail. Then find some new project or even hobby - something relaxing, doesn’t have to be academic, fishing even? I note the title of this section is “That’s all folks” - there is usually a sequel to that phrase on TV. I bought pajamas as a Christmas present for my special woman and on the front it has Mickey Mouse saying “Hey folks” and it made me think - that after six to twelve months you should appeal the block and come back and make a post titled “Hey folks”.--] | ] 12:53, 8 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I've been off-wiki for over a week, and just saw this info. I agree that an indef block and a long time away obviate a lengthy messy ArbCom case, which is probably good, but I feel that your importance to Misplaced Pages, and the numerous people attesting to that, should persuade you to return for an appeal and unblock request after six months to a year. I think the time away may calm down your over-enthusiasm, and allow bygones to be bygones. I'd like to thank you for all of your extensive COI work. Among other things, you were (ironically) the instigating force behind at least two very important and effective ArbCom cases, as well as a number of non-ArbCom cases of very extensive and complex webs of organized COI editing which spanned numerous noticeboards and talkpages. I think it's plain that you are a net positive, and that after time away you can and should return. Cheers, ] (]) 21:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Your contributions to handling COI issues have strengthend the project. You should return. Indviduals can be replaced, but dedication and skill take a long time to build. Please come up with a plan to take a role here again. If you feel frustrated with a problem, ask for advice, or, at least, a sounding board. I look forward to seeing your successful appeal in June. — ] (]) 07:16, 10 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I posted some thoughts regarding this issue at ]. Of course I do not want to see you go. Thanks for what you have done and happy future projects. ]] 19:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*We haven't always agreed, and at times your manner of interacting with others was highly irritating. But your record of accomplishment and contributions are a monument to your dedication to the project. I tip my hat and wish you fair winds and following seas wherever the ship of life takes you. Farewell. -] (]) 19:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Sad to see that such a prolific contributor had to leave. Hope you are reading this and will return back someday--''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 20:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*If any efforts are made to bring Jytdog back to the project in any capacity--please ping me as I would support. Personally, I feel like exceptions should be made for exceptional editors. Best wishes to Jytdog wherever you are ] (]) 14:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Oh my lord. I just started editing Misplaced Pages and you were always there on the articles around me. I knew something was going on, but I didn't understand the depth of it. Jytdog, you will be missed. Thank you for everything you've done and taught me. ] (]) 16:23, 18 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*Sorry to see you go. We didn't see eye to eye on every issue but I always respected your views and had a high opinion of your work against COI POV pushing. ] <sub>]</sub> 08:43, 19 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
== Seriously? == | |||
* In my opinion it's disastrous to see you go. You are/were a breath of fresh air in Misplaced Pages.] (]) 10:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
:{{tps}} Oh no, what did he do? -] (]) 15:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::ich weiss nicht, ueber was er spricht. ] (]) 21:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
* (just heard about this) Goddammit man. I'm in complete agreement with ] above, which says something. I sympathize and empathize with your description of what went down. Just want to say what you probably already know, which is that your insights, dedication and honesty have made a big difference around here, and to me specifically. Very few editors would've cared enough to wade through my perseverative walls of text, identify the wheat and chaff, and help sort it. You have a superb eye for both nuance and the big picture, which will continue to benefit the areas you focus on, and -- illegitimi non carborundum -- make them rewarding. | |||
==Jdilts== | |||
:I hope you have fulfilling and fortunate days ahead, and that if you ever want to, you come back exactly when, how and as you choose. (Inspirational verses/vibe: Bob Marley & the Wailers, "Coming In From The Cold"; .) Happy New Year & IRL-ing. --] <small>(] • ] | ] • ])</small> 10:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
Jdilts, edits under his real name and is under a conflict of interest. It's perfectly acceptable to post his name and evidence of COI in these circumstances. ] (]) 17:16, 18 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I strongly disagree. Especially if the user has not said so him or herself. You can of course restore what you wrote, but I will bring you to ANI and in my view, you will likely be site-banned. Outing is serious business and the policy cannot just be blown off. It is perfectly possible to state a case at COIN without OUTING someone. You can say something like "The user Amoon has been editing the article about Company X in a promotional way. Amoon has not made any statement about their relationship with Company X." You ~might~ add something like "There is a person named Andrew Moon at Company X" - just that, saying no more than that, making no claims connecting Amoon to Andrew Moon. You ~might~ get away with doing that, but I would not even do that. Outing is serious. Really. People are site-banned for it. COI is serious too, and I work hard on it, staying very, very clear of OUTING. Dealing with COI in WP is controversial in many ways; one of the "hottest" areas of disagreements is that people who get interested in COI will start to completely blow off OUTING - you are doing exactly that. ] (]) 17:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
* I just heard about this now. I feel sad. It was thrilling and rewarding to work with you on the BLP of our favorite errant statistician. You were tough, but also fair. I mourned your topic ban when it occurred, and now this. Happy hunting, in a place of your choice. Your contributions will be missed.--] (]) 00:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
He edits under Jdilts. He has outed himself. This is perfectly acceptable under the harassment policy, which specially mentions COI and editing under real names. | |||
*Wait, what? Apparently I somehow managed to miss all of this. Sorry to see you go, Jytdog. It will be strange to not see you around the place. --] (]) 22:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
"The fact that a person either has posted personal information or edits under their own name, making them easily identifiable through online searches, is not an excuse for "opposition research". Dredging up their off line opinions to be used to repeatedly challenge their edits can be a form of harassment, just as doing so regarding their past edits on other Misplaced Pages articles may be. However, if individuals have identified themselves without redacting or having it oversighted, such information can be used for discussions of conflict of interest (COI) in appropriate forums. If redacted or oversighted personally identifying material is important to the COI discussion, then it should be emailed privately to an administrator or arbitrator – but not repeated on Misplaced Pages: it will be sufficient to say that the editor in question has a COI and the information has been emailed to the appropriate administrative authority. Issues involving private personal information (of anyone) could also be referred by email to a member of the functionaries team. | |||
* I also agree with the statements by Doc James and Mathglot. You have been a valuable contributor during your time here and I'm sorry things turned out the way they did. I hope you come back to Misplaced Pages one day. I wish you all the best with life. ] (] - ]) 15:03, 14 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 17:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Block == | |||
There I have reposted it removing the identifying information. I still strongly disagree with you though. ] (]) 17:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
<!-- ] 04:48, 8 December 2028 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1859863718}} | |||
::"Jdilts" could be random. It could be operated by a person named Jane Diltmoreland. It could be operated by the person you think it is. It could be operated by someone else (even you), who is trying to embarrass the person you are claiming is operating it. We have no way of knowing. You are the one making the connection; no one else. I very much encourage you to search the archives at ], and if you don't find an answer there, ask the general question at ] (you could use the "Amoon" example I used above) before taking the very risky step of making that claim yet again. ] (]) 17:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{Arbcomblock}} | |||
You can see the relevant motion ]. -- ] <small>]</small> 07:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I am very sad to see this. I can only echo the words of {{U|DGG}} and say how much I appreciated your support on the various issues we were working on. Take care of yourself. ] (]) 06:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
==test== | |||
*I know we have disagreed over stuff when we've met, but I've always thought you were absolutely first and foremost here to improve the encyclopedia, and that comes across incredibly strongly in your work. Consequently, I am sad to see this case of affairs. Take care. ] ] ] 14:09, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I can't believe this. WP will not be the same without you. Even though I am an admin and you are not, you were my go-to person whenever I suspected COI editing. I have been on a 3 month wikibreak myself and only a few days ago decided to come back. Seeing you blocked makes me doubt the wisdom of that decision. The spammers must be popping dozens of bottles of expensive champagne... Please don't scramble completely, leave your email. I sincerely hope to see you back one day. Take care. --] (]) 14:17, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I really wish you wouldn't take matters into your own hands liberally and aggressively despite of several people including myself have asked you not to do so in the past, and alienates good and bad COI editors indiscriminately altogether in the name of "helping" them to manage their COI. Perhaps you were too devoted to the project, which is evident by all the messages you received on this page. Come back after a year or so, when ArbCom is filled with more people that actually cares about the purpose and the integrity of the project, rather than self-appointed judges of misguided principles. ] (]) 09:07, 9 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*] I hope this means we will see you running next year? We are likely going to need a bunch of new folks on arbcom if we wish things to change. ] (] · ] · ]) 15:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
**{{re|Doc James}} Unlikely, since for the short amount of time I have been there I have seen too many members along the lines of paid editing is not big deal or everyone including spammers should have the right to enjoy "protection" in order to feel "safe" to "work" here without understanding the purpose of Misplaced Pages and that this is both a project and a encyclopedia. Maybe you should run since people would likely listen to you a bit more as you are more involved with the general movement itself. ] (]) 10:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*** I concur. I was even reprimanded and my edits revdel'ed when I pointed that a WP article on a clinician was created by a PR agency who also developed his website and promoted him on the radio/TV. Still, I was taken to ANI for OUT-ing, with all the bad consequences for me. BTW, the article is still there while I no longer come near any COI issues, even if obvious. So, a change of attitude is long overdue. — ] ] 13:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*I had posted a hidden Do Not Archive template on this section, since there are several well wishes here, namely from ], ], ], and ]. {{U|Tryptofish}} has removed the DNAU template. Do you guys want the template replaced? ] (]) 23:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
**I hadn't thought of that, sorry. I thought it was just perma-keeping the block notice. I have no objection to restoring the template. --] (]) 23:52, 11 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
**I put it back. --] (]) 01:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
***Thanks, Uncle Fishy. Not only does the thread preserve the well wishes, it also alerts the unsuspecting that there's no point in posting new queries or complaints on this talkpage, and thus saves watchers a lot of time and explanations. It's perhaps not ideal in some people's minds to have the "Block" thread here, but Jytdog wanted to leave in a rather drastic fashion anyway, and there are other more genially titled threads that will be retained as well. ] (]) 02:16, 12 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
****{{(:}} --] (]) 21:11, 12 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
*As you probably know, I learned a lot from you, Jytdog (in relation to how to evaluate what is administrator noticeboard worthy or not at first, conflict of interest editing, determining medically reliable sources, some aspects of the pseudoscience related policy, and of what Misplaced Pages is not, as well as other general things by silently watching your busy talk page). I would like to thank you for all that you've done here. I am now aware of the circumstances that lead to your block and sudden retirement. If you eventually are back, this will be good news to me. —]] – 06:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
== ] closed == | |||
I am not sure if this is how I communicate with you on your talk page. Are you getting this message? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
<!-- ] 10:09, 12 March 2029 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1868004554}} | |||
:yes! ] (]) 15:54, 19 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedy has been enacted: | |||
#{{user|Jytdog}} is indefinitely ] from the English Misplaced Pages. He may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. | |||
==Resolution of COI?== | |||
Hi Jytdog-I was wondering if we could get the resolution of the COI tag on Lorna Taylor's page? Thanks --] (]) 03:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
For the Arbitration Committee, ] (]) 00:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
==COI Issue== | |||
: Discuss this at: ''']'''<!-- ] (]) 00:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes--> | |||
Hello Jytdog, Yes I am a paid editor, may I know how to disclose the employer, client, and affiliation? ] (]) 06:39, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hi Balaji E.M, thanks for your note and for disclosing. it would be great if you reply at the ] posting - I will say more there. Thanks again. ] (]) 13:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Carrying on== | |||
Hello Jytdog, | |||
<!-- ] 04:48, 8 December 2028 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1859863695}} | |||
Yes I work for The company that has deployed a new Remote surveillance system for all the PG&E Critical sites. The intention was to verify that some of the allocated budget to improve security and publicly communicated has been spent and deployed with GREAT results... We are working directly with PG&E Corporate security and have been part of conference discussions with Homeland Security and FBI representatives. | |||
I shall be checking this talk page every day or two, and shall try to respond to problems raised. I can not however keep track of other edits to pages that jytdog may have been watching, but if help is needed on any, let me know either here on on my own talk page. I can only try to help deal with the problems that my role should have been to prevent. But a committee is a committee, and WP is a place where none of us can expect to always have things as we would like them. ''']''' (]) 08:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
This is all in reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/Metcalf_sniper_attack and the aftermath, solution? I tried different wording options, sorry that I am new to contributing to Misplaced Pages. We would just like to update the public with the new systems that have been deployed and have resulted in Security Improvements... | |||
:Clearly, Jytdog leaves behind a hole that will be difficult to fill, and it would certainly be good if editors would each try to help wherever they can, even though no one will be able to cover everything. I guess two broad areas are matters related to ] and some areas of biomedical research; he also had an editing interest in the history of religion. --] (]) 20:38, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
Regards... <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:14, 30 March 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:: is a useful guide he wrote for new WP users, slanted toward WP:MED, COI, and sourcing-template orientation. How best to preserve it? --] (]) 23:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::: Generally I use ] when I preserve things, but can you explain why this needs to be preserved? ] (]) 23:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::Preferring ] for long-term preservation ;>) I see it as a concise guide that might serve some new users as an alternate/supplement to ] or ], and if agreed as useful, should be kept accessible. --] (]) 00:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::: But things don't just disappear around here, it should hang around without any special preservation. ] (]) 01:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
::::::I guess it could be a question of moving it from user space to WP space. Or giving it a good shortcut and linking to it from pages in WP space. --] (]) 22:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
] qualifies as a useful essay and should be moved to ]. ] (]) 21:16, 12 December 2018 (UTC) | |||
:Yes. And for starters, it will be reproduced in the next issue of ''The Signpost''. ] (]) 12:21, 1 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
== Jytdog should consider returning back == | |||
==What hope is there? Jytdog == | |||
<!-- ] 06:36, 5 March 2029 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1867387001}} | |||
]]</span>'']] | |||
I just wanted to state that Misplaced Pages community is not the same without Jytdog and he is being missed. If real life permits, Jytdog should consider return back to editing. | |||
*'''Please come back'''<s>Support</s> as I feel his absence has left a huge gap in areas Jytdog helped. No one is infallible, we learn and move on. I am sure you will read this, Hoping to see you back some day. --''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 19:18, 28 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
*What is this? You can't ''vote'' someone back to wikipedia when they've left by choice. If Jytdog wishes to return, he knows what he needs to do. ] (]) 19:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
::This isn't a "Vote him back", just a show of support for his work and a 'non binding', wish from a fellow editor that he should "consider" returning back. --''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 19:30, 28 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
*'''Hoping he'll come back'''. Ok, so this is not a !vote and "support" or "oppose" is not appropriate. But I for one sincerely hope that Jytdog will reconsider and come back. If this account has indeed be scrambled, then under a new account. Jytdog is sorely missed. --] (]) 18:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
**Him returning would require us dealing with the arbcom motion. The details of the case that resulted in arbcom action are more or less public: Jytdog inappropriately contacted an editor by phone and for that he needs to be significantly warned. Do we the community feel it deserves an indefinite ban? That would require further discussion. ] (] · ] · ]) 22:49, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
***For what little it is worth, any return would involve a private discussion between him and ArbCom, but the rest of the community would not be involved in that. That's how the process works. I do hope to see him back eventually, but it's not my decision. --] (]) 23:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
****If a super majority feels that arbcom has over reached, IMO we could technically over ride arbcom. ] (] · ] · ]) 23:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
***** <nowiki></nowiki> -- ] | ] 23:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
***{{ping|Doc James}} I get where you are coming from, but please consider the effect your words have on the people who are victims of harassment. Here's a member of the board that oversees the organization charged with protecting Misplaced Pages editors from online and offline harassment seemingly downplaying or excusing an editor who harassed another editor ''in real life''. The last idiot who cold-called me to harass me had a chat with a police sergeant, but not everyone is going to have a friendly police sergeant on hand to take their complaint seriously. They likely will have only the Foundation to turn to, and your responsibility is to all the editors served by the foundation, not just Jytdog. ] <small>(])</small> 23:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
****People mess up. And we all agree that Jytdog messed up in this case. The question is more about what is an appropriate punishment for someone who has done this, admits it was wrong, and agrees to never do it again. ] (] · ] · ]) 23:15, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
*****Actually, I don't think that the community ''can'' overrule ArbCom, nor should we. --] (]) 23:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
******Sure and I imagine that would be the position of many. I am not saying it is likely that a community discussion would result in a super majority for a lessor punishment or that their is much if any chance of a return of Jytdog even if the ban was lifted. So this is likely all just academic and a mute point. ] (] · ] · ]) 23:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
*****Ignoring whether or not the community can override ArbCom, Jytdog has not been punished for harassment. The indef block is to ensure that Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case, as we don't want a situation where editors can temporarily retire during a case and then return later to avoid facing it. No decision of punishment has been made by ArbCom in relation to the specific case. If the indef was removed, Jytdog would still need to go through ArbCom, who may or may not impose a ban and/or block. - ] (]) 01:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
******There was no stipulation in the block report that "Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case". Only that an ArbCom case was accepted, but since Jytdog had retired and presumably scrambled his password, he was blocked indefinitely and he can only be unlocked by going directly to ArbCom. Stating that "Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case" -- in other words, a full ArbCom case, is inferring facts not in evidence. ] (]) 03:05, 22 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
*******I guess you can interpret it as you see fit. Fundamentally, a case was accepted and was agreed to be opened, but couldn't continue because Jytdog chose to retire rather than be involved in it. Therefore the account was indef blocked, the case was unable to be opened "at this time", and they can't continue to edit unless they get permission from ArbCom. As there is an accepted case, the "at this time" was specifically added to address the possibility of reopening the case if - as Opabinia regalis put it - Jytdog chooses to "stop and face the music". They could agree to resolve the issue by a motion, privately or otherwise, without opening the case, or they could open it, or whatever, but hopefully this just remains moot and we don't have to worry about it. - ] (]) 04:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
*****{{tq|...Jytdog messed up in this case.}} And in the previous cases. ~ <span style="color:#DF00A0">Amory</span><small style="color:#555"> ''(] • ] • ])''</small> 01:39, 22 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
*Jytdog may appeal his block by contacting ArbCom. That is not up for debate. What happens after that is as-yet unknown, neither set in stone nor explicitly laid out by ArbCom. There's no point in trying to parse unknowns, even the unknowns about whether Jytdog could regain access to this account or whether the password is forever blocked. What we can do is offer our support re: wishing for his return. ] (]) 23:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
*I wish you would come back. You were too valuable and too dedicated to be lost over something petty like this, and the whole thing was a massive overreaction. I hope that you will reconsider your exile, and that Arbcom will, at this point, quickly resolve your case with minimal damage imposed. All the best, ] ] 07:06, 17 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
*What Swarm says. ]] | |||
* ] . We miss you, come back. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 11:29, 26 June 2019 (UTC) | |||
*'''Comment''': The best way IMVHO would be for Jytdog to ask for ArbCom's continuation of the case that was opened (and then closed after Jytdog's voluntary departure). It would make re-entry quite easier ''and'' in accordance to Misplaced Pages rules. -] (]) 05:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC) | |||
*I for one hope to see a return given recent events even though many editors familiar with your good work are distracted by other ongoings, but we'll have to see how ArbCom reacts to the current case. ] (]) 03:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC) | |||
*Hmm so he did and ] the ]. Thanks for everyone's time and maybe there's a possibility in another 12 months... —]] – 09:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
*It makes me angry when I see this, and note the number of tossers who edit this project. -] ] 16:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
*Why doesn't someone just dig up his phone number, call him up, and ask him if he wants to come back? (Just kidding of course!) I miss Jytdog, too. Pretty much all of our WP:MEDRS watchdogs have necessarily had a lot of bark (and unnecessarily some bite). Hopefully the attrition rate will not worsen (I'm thinking also of a couple of T-bans). Just re-reading Jytdog's user-page essay on COI and related matters is a pleasure (in a WP policy-wonk way, anyhow). He really got it, and a version of that material should be edited down to an {{tl|information page}} or other advice piece, both on how to avoid COI (especially in STEM, GLAM, etc.), and on how to detect it and help others avoid it. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — ] ] ] 😼 </span> 23:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
*: Jyt, dog! Missing your consideration and spirit today in particular. I just ran across your thoughtful contribution to a discussion elsewhere and wanted to consult you, and remembered this was just the commemorative-tea-cozy version of a talk page now. Hoping you're very well indeed. <span style="color:#666">– ]]</span> 00:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Jytdog's good work noted in the media == | |||
He discriminates. What hope is there for me to contribute! I'll create an account with even my own personal real life name. Will it help? It won't help. | |||
<!-- ] 10:09, 12 March 2029 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1868004554}} | |||
I miss Jytdog, COI editing's one of my personal bugbears here & he's one of several editors who've helped me deal with the issues. He gets a nice mention in this HuffPo article on corporate spindoctors using questionable tactics to push POV and promo material & frustrate good editing https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wikipedia-paid-editing-pr-facebook-nbc-axios_n_5c63321be4b03de942967225. He did some stuff wrong, but it's a shame to see someone who did so much to keep this place reliable not be here any longer. ] (]) 23:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
:] good share. Worthy appreciation of good work. Hope Jytdog also notices this.--''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 06:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for sharing. ] (]) 07:29, 15 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
They discriminate and that's it. I'm not even going to argue. | |||
:I put this article on ] and "This talk page has been mentioned by a media organization":ed it on six article talkpages. ] (]) 11:16, 15 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
He didn't even READ what I wrote to him. He didn't even have the common decency to address my concerns. Do continue like this. If it makes you feel better, good. Run things like that. He didn't read anything. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
: i don't know what article you are working on. but please keep your focus on content and sources, and what policies and guidelines say. and when there are disputes about content, remain calm and use the procedures laid out in ]. Things never have to become emotional here. Take your time. Really listen to other people, too. Seek consensus. Good luck! ] (]) 15:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::There's plenty of us miss Jytdog, and yet this sort of thing continues, increasingly unchecked. Plenty of them would have rejoiced at his block. ] (]) 14:53, 16 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
::I appreciate your words Jytdog, but I've given up. An article rated C is enough for me. On a level 4 article. That's good enough for you. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:::like i said, i don't know what article you are working on, and i don't know what the dispute is. but getting all emotional doesn't help - it gets in the way. good luck to you, really. ] (]) 15:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::It's about objectivity and the truth. Neutrality. Thank you for comments. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:53, 20 March 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== I'd appreciate a look at the South Beach Diet article. == | |||
I believe it accurately reflects a current NPOV perspective: i.e. that it has clinical acceptance by physicians because of its accessibility, and its worth to patients with the metabolic syndrome; but that nutritionists remain skeptical about the first phase's net benefits to the rest of the population. I've looked through many college-level nutrition texts, and the overwhelming majority do not classify it as a "fad diet" now, and I think anyone can see the distinct break between diets such as SB and Atkins, which provide quantifiable benefits, although perhaps not optimum ones, and the sort of loonacy(sic) that many ] promote. I'm sorry to see the other fellow is taking a break; while I think he was wrong here, a skeptical eye never hurts, especially when a commercial POV is being actively fostered. ] (]) 15:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
: i think i un-unwatchlisted it. i will re-watch list it. always happy to consider new content based on sources that comply with MEDRS -- if you have them, please bring them at the article. thanks. (btw, people take "fad diet" much more pejoratively than they should do - it just a term for most of all these diets that a) make proposals that go beyond the common sense things of limiting your caloric intake, eating a balanced diet, and getting enough exercise and b) have a whole money-making machine behind them, with branding etc to get there) ] (]) 15:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Well, I think "fad" becomes a misnomer at a certain point; Atkins, for instance, has clear roots that go back to Banting, and has clear cosmetic worth, and some clinical...although how much remains an open question. South Beach really does seem mainstream in modern med sources, with three important caveats: the earlier versions empasized ] rather than ]; the diet was designed specifically for people who are borderline diabetics, generally, and what is a worthwhile trade-off for someone with ] might not be for someone who isn't affected with it; and over time, the importance of exercise has been emphasized more. | |||
::It also suffers, like any dieting text must, from the conflict between scientific observation and coaching. There's a fine line between cajolery and misrepresentation. ] (]) 16:01, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
==That "shout" page== | |||
I pretty much knew as soon as I read the article and a few references that this'd be a long, possibly even resultless slog, it's not my fist rodeo, plus I'm tired, plus I've got an assignment due in 2 days I should be working on. I'm actually starting to wish that this guy hadn't mentioned the article to me the other day, after all, even if I manage to make the article truly reflective of the pros and cons of naturopathy in all its forms, there's nothing to stop the original smear campaigner from just reverting it all back. By the lingo I mean I don't know the acronyms, I know that the sentence contradicts one of the sources, but I don't know how to find out what that's called. Anyway, read the sentence and the two references if you like, and if you can't understand what I'm saying from that, I don't know what else I can do. I'm rekt. I'm going to go and dream that they renewed perception for another season.] (]) 20:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I am sorry. i know what it is like to come across an article that is a complete wreck and to fight uphill to fix it. i have done that. but you need to move slowly, seriously, carefully, and respectfully - keep it human the whole way. really listen, and really talk, and always try to communicate and be as ready to change as you hope others will be. you build a reputation as you go.... and what you have done so far is dig a hole. what i appreciate, is that you have kept it human. keep that up! good luck. ] (]) 20:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
A little better rested. I've posted again in ] if that isn't sufficient I'm not sure what else I can do.] (]) 02:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
: hope you had a good sleep! i will check it. ] (]) 03:18, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Please read the talk page and the recent edits and reverts. What's the highest power I can appeal to on systematic NPOV violations? My sources are being accused of not lining up with the tone of the page. Even a reference to australian qualifications and private health rebates was removed.] (]) 06:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I advised you to '''take it slow'''. The edit note where you were first reverted says "Let's take this a little slower. At least part of the added content has issues with undue weight. Let's discuss on talk. " And per ], you absolutely '''should''' be willing to discuss your changes, calmly and based on PAG. I told you to take it slow... take your time. You cannot charge in to ''any article'' and demand everything be fixed '''right now just like you want it'''. That doesn't fly anywhere in WP, for any reason. ] (]) 12:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I've just read your edits and the Talk page discussion. Please do read ]. You are exhibiting many of the behaviors there. Please think about that. Please. Please remember that the absolute foundation of Misplaced Pages is ] - which means really dialoguing with other editors, on the basis of PAG. That takes time. It is literally impossible to turn any article around 180 degrees overnight. It takes time to gain consensus - this is the deeply human heart of WP. You really must acknowledge that and behave accordingly. You are interacting with other humans. If you continue as you are, you are going to either burn out quickly and leave angry, or you are going to get thrown out of here, and you will waste a bunch of other people's time in the process. ] (]) 14:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
I was commenting on the editing, there's been some pretty poor justifications for rollbacks or refusing edits. One of the reasons I was initially given for rejection of a reference is that it was 10 years old. However, when I remove text from a section devoted to current regulations because it was 40 years old I was undoed. I already added stuff about the current regulatory environment in Australia and not all of it was from the government report which was contended, at any rate it seems both government reports are fine to be used as a basis for things not pertaining to medical evidence, so I assume I can have back the majority of what I wrote before? I'm afraid to ask for dread of what excuse will be cooked up next.] (]) 14:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Also you'll notice the sections I added were balanced, because I actually believe in the scientific method and an informed debate, one of the reasons I wouldn't try to support some common naturopathic practices scientifically, I'm there mostly for the herbs and nutrition.] (]) 14:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:you are not listening. like i said, it is hard to watch you self-destruct. you are not being patient at all - there is ] here. Take your time, and work it through. I think you have some reasonable points, but you are acting unreasonably and that is destroying your credibility. ] (]) 15:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::It would be very useful if you would list what you consider to be Gudzwabofer's reasonable points so that we could comment on them - it would also be nice if you could get Gud to indent his posts properly. Just sayin. -] (]) 15:08, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Yeah I need to work on some less contentious pages for a bit and contend my self with the couple of minor changes I got through for now. The problem is that the page already was personal. When people cherry pick facts to push an agenda it's not science, it's not neutral, and it's not dispassionate. The reason that the skeptic project has it rated as a B is they think they've done a pretty good job of rubbishing a profession that is largely built on millennia of tradition that mainstream western medicine forgot about in the middle ages and is now trying to patent.] (]) 15:09, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::'''no it is not personal'''. to the extent you personalize this, you are dramatically fucking up and you '''will''' end up getting thrown out of here. slow down. deal with one thing at a time. if what you want is the selfish emotional satisfaction of expressing outrage, you are doing that very effectively. if what you want is to improve the article, you are fucking up, thoroughly. ] (]) 15:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::Look I might be a little bit schizo, but I'm not an idiot. There is a double standard here. My criticisms of some sources still haven't been answered with full academic justification, yet I'm not allowed to remove them, but when I try to add a source of my own, it's quickly removed by someone who doesn't even bother to read the references. I'm not even allowed to remove redundancies when things are mentioned twice, even when one of those things is in the wrong section. I'm well aware that I'm the only natural medicine afficionado working on this page at the moment, and from the tone of the article you all see me as completely misinformed.] (]) 15:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::: you are not giving anyone time to even fucking think. i am only just now reading the victoria source. '''SLOW THE FUCK DOWN'''. ] (]) 15:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::: ok soz, that last part wasn't directed at you anyway] (]) 15:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::::you are not giving '''anyone''' time to think. i have told you to take it slow (look at how many times I wrote that. really -- go look!) and you are completely ignoring that. get off your fucking high horse and remember that you are dealing with other human beings. get down here on the ground and WALK. you have to gain ] and that takes time, effort, and patience. And real dialogue. Dialogue is not making demands and expecting compliance yesterday. ] (]) 15:31, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::there's also a new oz gov commissioned report coming out on the 1st of April (no joke). I mentioned it in the dearly departed updated reguation section. Yeah I'm kind of in the middle of assignment writing adrenaline. Like I said I'm gonna work on other pages for a bit, maybe some nice innocuous botany stubs] (]) 15:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} I just saw you posted a second source to RSN, in the same section as the first. You abusing RSN now. That board is for asking specific sections about the use of specific sources. One source and the content for which it is used, at a time. Again, you are making a hash of things. Please remove the discussion of the second source for now. One thing at a time! ] (]) 15:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I am a single person. I am dealing with about five other issues in WP now, plus there is content I want to write that is still waiting for my time, and my wife wants to go get some food. that is true for everybody here. please stop just throwing shit at the wall everywhere you can. if you keep doing it, i am just going to walk away from this whole mess you are making. i mean that. i have limited bandwidth and i will not keep investing my time in a disaster. ] (]) 15:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Just go, there's nothing stopping you, wikipedia and the naturopathy page will still be a mess tomorrow, as they were yesterday. I'm logging off, the heartfelt speel on my page is the last for the night. I think I'll have to try and convince myself to leave the majority of this job up to a hippie with more patience for bs. No hard feelings.] (]) 16:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} you are still missing the point. throwing so many things up in the air at once, and demanding answers to all of them at the same time, will get you no where and will waste a bunch of everyone's time. ] (]) 16:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::Hey, Jdog. Have you seen XKCD number 386? -] (]) 18:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::: what is that? ] (]) 18:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::http://xkcd.com/386/ You are welcome. -] (]) 18:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::: :) ] (]) 18:42, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::::Have you seen xkcd before? Did you mouseover the image? -] (]) 18:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} i have seen a couple of things there - they have some really on-point ones. yes i did mouseover - sweet little easter egging. :) ] (]) 18:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
I am trying to close out a {{tl|request edit}} for ''National Report'' - I'm not quite sure why cited content has been removed, but I have removed the sentence about when the first article was posted. Can we come to an agreement. I'm more than a little confused by what seems to be an edit war.--<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">] ]</span> 00:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
: I opened a discussion on the Talk page already. ] (]) 00:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:: You tagged me as edit waring, but you're the instigator. Fine. Can you just delete the history section if you won't even allow me to post properly cited material? Did you even look at my last change before you reverted it? It netted you essentially where you were at. Let's stop this craziness.--<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">] ]</span> 00:14, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::you are not an article Talk page user i guess. anyway it looks fine now. ] (]) 01:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::Nope, I haven't posted a thing to ] :). I was just trying to work with one conversation.--<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">] ]</span> 02:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Undoing my edit == | |||
Why did you undo my editing of line 74 under "Polygraph"? This is factual information relevant to the topic. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:39, 22 March 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I would be happy to discuss at the article Talk page. please bring it up there. thanks. ] (]) 19:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Tone at Foie Gras RFC == | |||
I just wanted to say that I think you should watch your tone at the RFC on Foie Gras, a mistake was made in procedure, albeit minor, and you damn near bit Dr Chrissy's head off, inserting your points, in bold, into their post. Not on. ] (]) 10:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks. I could have handled that better, yes. I did not insert my comment into their post, however. ? ] (]) 12:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Patrick Awuah == | |||
Hi Jytdog, | |||
The article below was deleted a couple of weeks ago on the basis of copyvio. | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Patrick_Awuah,_Jr.&action=edit&redlink=1 | |||
The article is being rewritten to eliminate the copyvios as much as possible. Kindly compare the current rewritten state against the copyvio terms to see if there's been any improvement. The goal is to improve and maintain the article, and not to violate any rules. | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/User:CopyvioAndSoWhat/sandbox?venotify=created | |||
Will it be possible to have an article with not one word or character match with a referenced article? | |||
Hope to hearing from you soon. | |||
thanks | |||
-- ] (]) 14:47, 24 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Ongoing conflict in Talk:Foie gras == | |||
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. | |||
== Possible ANI == | |||
I have decided I have had enough of edits that are uncivil, inflammatory, goading, taunting, inaccurate, disruptive, demeaning, prophanity, misleading and just plain wrong. Cease and disist or I will raise an ANI.__] (]) 23:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::there already is one. i really don't know what has you so riled. just keep things simple, focused on content. ] (]) 00:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Patents as primary sources == | |||
I collaborated with Wikiisawsome by posting to his talk page and he did not respond. And now I'm collaborating with you. | |||
I do not understand why you are reverting my edit and locking the page. I am not citing a patent for any content or claim in the patent. I am adhering EXACTLY to the Misplaced Pages guidelines on patents found at: | |||
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:PATENTS#Are_patents_reliable_sources.3F | |||
The relevant part of that Misplaced Pages page states: | |||
"Thus both issued patents and patent applications have extremely limited use as sources on Misplaced Pages: | |||
* They are reliable for simple, descriptive statements about their existence (e.g., "A patent was issued on to Alice Expert on May 5, 2010...")." | |||
I am making simple, descriptive statements about the existence of the CRISPR patents. I do not cite any content or claims from the patents. I only cite metadata included in the patent headings. That metadata includes the date the patent was filed, the names of the inventors, and the dates that prior provisional patent applications were filed. That information is germain to the CRISPR invention and the patents are legitimate primary sources for that information. | |||
All I have done is rely upon the patents for four simple facts: the date of filing, the inventors, the assignees and the date of the earliest provisional patent application. Published patents and patent applications are, indisputably, the most primary source possible for that kind of information. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:I would be happy to discuss on the article Talk page. would you please put your response there? it is much better for everybody to have a centralized discussion. thanks. ] (]) 22:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== huh? == | |||
Never seen such action/judgement. If you disagree or want to comment, you can do so directly. -] (]) 00:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:completely out of line. do not restore it. ] (]) 00:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Just a note on , but I already have an ANI case part way put together I was originally going to submit to AN3. If you see this before submitting anything, I'll likely have mine up at ANI in not too long (not a great way to spend one of my few days available for Misplaced Pages this week). ] (]) 00:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::{{ec}}More simple: do not edit someone else's comments. If you disagree, then talk. (t-a-l-k). Don't template-address editors. Don't say "warning" as an opinion. And for you: do not edit my userspace again. -] (]) 00:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Stephen Joseph Rosetti == | |||
You need to read an article before you say he was never a CEO of anything. Fourth line says "He served as President and CEO of ]". The category is correct. ] (]) 00:12, 28 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:i missed that, thanks. will self revert. ] (]) 00:20, 28 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Notice there is an ANI regarding your behaviour toward me == | |||
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding Your behaviour towards me. The thread is ].The discussion is about the topic Protracted uncivility and harassment. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. | |||
*I've closed said discussion as both the community feedback and your response have been pretty straightforward (despite the intrinsic drama). Given the fact that you've acknowledged the issue here, apologized, and accepted a "warning" I won't patronize you by writing out a warning regarding civility. However I will remind you about our helpful catchphrase, "Comment on '''content''', not on the '''contributor'''." I know it can be very hard when you get frustrated, but the key point is that very few things on this site are ''worth'' allowing yourself to get to that level of frustration. As long as you remain focused on content, you won't go wrong, and if you're really having an issue with another editor, you need to trust the proper channels to help you resolve those situations. Regardless, I completely trust that you'll remain true to your sentiments at ANI and do not wish to open yourself up to any more scrutiny with future incidents that garner complaints. Happy editing and regards, ] ] 02:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks for your note. I let myself go there for a while, and that lack of restraint is all on me. I accept the warning. ] (]) 02:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::It happens to the best of us. ] ] 02:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== RfC == | |||
Please stop edit warring on the RfC. In fact, I think in your own interests you should consider removing it from your watchlist, as you said you would a couple of days ago. You've posted to it around 70 times since 22 March. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 19:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I was going to but then drchrissy pinged me despite promising not to... and i had been considering anyway that I had let it all get under my skin too much. i am in a good place now and will continue editing that article in a civil manner. Thanks for fixing the big text insertion, but your move of the subsection broke a threaded discussion, so i moved it back. And I've posted a lot, in a lot of places, the past month. ] (]) 19:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Swearing == | |||
Is really fucking healthy. -] (]) 15:42, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:thanks. and for the edit note with it. stupid me. ] (]) 15:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::As in real life there's a time and a place. These also are powerful words that lose some of that power when overused. ] (]) 16:25, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::agreed, thanks. ] (]) 16:26, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Hounding == | |||
{{u|SlimVirgin}}, , I'll just put the same question here with some variation. | |||
In my view, I am being hounded, and you are supporting it, and definitely are not trying to stop it. and to be "an outspoken opponent of any sort of on- or off-wiki harassment or stalking of editors, and has commendably worked to call attention to serious problems in this area, but has sometimes been too ready to accuse editors of this type of misconduct unnecessarily." What happened to that person? You are doing the ''opposite'' of being "too ready to accuse" others of hounding. Why are you supporting the hounding of me, and opening the door wide for others to be hounded with your proposal to lower the bar to taking action on "apparent COI"? I appreciate you be willing to answer. And let me add here, that I am not comparing what I have gone through, to what you went through. I don't know the whole story, but it appears that you went through hell, and I am sorry that you did. | |||
I acknowledge that what you wrote was " If you'd like to ask me something about your situation," and you may not consider my questions to be about my situation. I think they are, as you appear to be me to be part of the current round... and I really don't get that. ] (]) 23:43, 29 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
*Hi Jytdog, just a note to let you know that I'll respond later or tomorrow, but I have to go offline for a bit now. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 01:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::thanks! ] (]) 01:04, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::Hi Jytdog, sorry, I started to write a response, but there are so many separate issues, I wasn't sure what to focus on. I think it's probably best if I just leave it. Just wanted to let you know in case you thought I had forgotten. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 04:58, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::OK, well thanks for making the attempt. i am open to hearing from you on these things, here or via email, if and when you like. ] (]) 11:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
Appreciate your insight on the Raben Group. Have no relation at all to them. The page now is strictly marketing drivel and my edits were all legit. Appreciate any assistance you can offer as an employee of theirs made it a marketing tool for them. ] (]) 00:58, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for your note. I'm watching the article and will be responding there. ] (]) 01:04, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== New paper on GMO scientific consensus == | |||
Hi, since you edit GMO-related articles so much I wanted to know what you thought of which states that "Claims of consensus on the safety of GMOs are not supported by an objective analysis of the refereed literature." ] ] 01:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:oh, the PR campaign continues! with ] as a co-author, nonetheless, and authors from ENNSR, with Seralini as reference 1. Hm! Thanks for pointing that out - will read.] (]) 01:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::thanks, i read it now. it says nothing new... it repeats what ENSSR and mysteriously unauthored document says - there is a PR campaign going on by this FRINGE group. It is pretty smart. The source you brought is a "discussion" paper - see for what that means in the journal; it is an editorial. And per MEDRS that is not a reliable source. It will likely get added to the Controversies article next to the earlier ENSSER statement. ] (]) 01:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::i've created a discussion about this ]. Thanks again! ] (]) 01:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
==single dealer== | |||
Hi again JYtdog. As per our discussion on March 19th, would you have time to look at the two pages Single dealer platforms and Paul Caplin? I note they still have warnings at the top of them, and this really detracts from some great content in there. Would you have time in the next day or so to review these in an effort to get these pages back to a non-warning status? Your efforts are very much appreciated. Kind regards, Jennifer] (]) 18:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:thanks, will try. many balls in the air right now. ] (]) 18:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Thank you Jytdog, I appreciate it. I would just like those pages back to being sound pieces of info and once that is done I will propose some additions that I think will be helpful to single dealer platforms. A lot of students use the page so having it warning free would be a big help. Appreciate you're very busy though! ] (]) 19:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Hi Jytdog - I wonder if I you'll have time to look at this before we head in to Easter weekend? I would really appreciate that. Thanks, ] (]) 14:44, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Jytdog - if you don't have time to do a clean up of these pages, can you suggest or nominate another wikipedia user who can? I am happy to reciprocate by reviewing and cleaning up any other pages that might be on your list. Thanks, ] (]) 14:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Hi Jytdog - hope you are well. Are you monitoring your talk page? I am still waiting to hear about the pages Single Dealer Platform and Paul Caplin as per our discussion on March 19th. They still appear with warnings. Is there another editor who can do a clean up if you do not have time? kind regards, ] (]) 12:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::Jennifer, you didn't answer Jytdogs question on March 19th, and so he has acted as such. If you want this sorted out, you need to answer the question on your Talk page first. Having seen the totality of your edits to both pages, this should be easily sorted out, ''but only if you engage with Jytdog.'' -] (]) 14:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::Hi Roxy the dog. Jytodoc and I have actually talked extensively about it (if you take a look at my talk page) and we left it that he would try to take a look at it over the weekend after March 19th, but so far just hasn't been able to get around to it. If there are outstanding questions I am more than happy to answer them, but I just understand at this point what they might be. Kind regards, ] (]) 15:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::<strike>Then you should read your Talk page again. I read it twice. Thanks. -] (]) 15:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)</strike> | |||
::::Sorry about that Jennifer, I was wrong. I've just seen the long section on your Talk, below the initial section where Jdog and yourself had an exchange. I hadn't realised the conversation went on to another section ''which I didn't initially read''. I think that the issue has become a little overdone as far as your edits are concerned, but JD has appeared to be totally snowed under with stuff recently, and this may have escaped him. Unless Jytdog objects, I may remove those tags myself later on. -] (]) 15:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
Great, thanks Roxy the dog. I know he's very snowed under. Basically my concern are the big tags at the top of the articles. If there is stuff in the articles that still needs to be removed I certainly don't mind, but I'd just like to see the articles get back to looking more valid and without those tags as they are a valuable resource with some of the only non-biased information out there (you'll see that any other article referencing single dealer platform is usually on a big bank's website, and all the other stuff about Paul Caplin is to sell music). Happy to help in any way I can with clean ups of other pages if anyone needs a hand with anything. Thanks, ] (]) 15:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
==What are== | |||
Your thoughts on this? ] It's a warning template to discourage COI accusation battlegrounding and lead editors to COIN. ] (]) 01:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:nice idea! I think the name is not helpful - you have to look at it through the recipient's eyes and i think the goal is to warn and urge, not offend... some other comments on its talk page. ] (]) 04:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Doubts== | |||
Sir, I have some doubts, would you like to clear it.] (]) 05:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:What? ] (]) 08:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
*Even-though some wiki pages have very less references, it is approved. May I know why?] (]) 04:22, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:: It sounds like you asking why some article are allowed to be created, and why some articles are deleted. I don't work in that space much, so I cannot tell you much. if you are talking about decisions that individuals make, i can say that i agree - the standards that are applied vary '''a lot'''. When the community decides, like at an AfD or an appeal, they ~tend~ to be more consistent in applying standards. ] (]) 11:34, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Review== | |||
They are using a review now Not sure if the review supports the content in question. ] (] · ] · ]) 12:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I got the review and have been reading. they followed it pretty closely (too closely at points). some over-certainty in the paraphrasing, and too technical overall. and those Capitals! ] (]) 12:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
==Request== | |||
Could you please use conventional punctuation in your discussions? It makes your material much easier to read, and makes your arguments look more professional and thoughtful. Thanks. ] (]) 13:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:is there someplace in particular you are struggling with? thx ] (]) 13:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Respect my privacy == | |||
Dear Jytdog, i can tell you i am member to a no-profit organization committed in overcome disabilities. I'm not sharing further personal information with you concerning my health status, especially on a open system. Thank you for your efforts to keep Misplaced Pages a better place. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Thanks for your note! I am sorry you interpreted my note as asking for any personal information - I will keep that in mind going forward when I reach out to folks. I'll reply further on your Talk page. ] (]) 15:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== jytdog == | |||
] just pinging you--] (]) 17:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:you double-pinged me by writing here and using the echo! ] (]) 17:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::remember the new Star Wars 7 trailer comes out in two weeks (a little change to agree with what you said below)--] (]) 17:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::i already did! but thanks. ] (]) 17:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::ive got your back too--] (]) 17:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:Jytdog you talking to yourself again?? :) <code>]]</code> 18:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::funny zad! | |||
::{{ec}} that is very nice of you Ozzie - You have a good heart. i need to count on you always giving your straight opinion. I screw up sometimes and am always glad to get feedback, either way. The key thing is that everybody comes to each issue fresh. We humans do form "packs" but the encyclopedia is a better place if we fight that instinct, and come to every issue with fresh eyes, and start out saying what we think regardless if others agree (but always listening and eventually trying to reach consensus). I'll know you have my back, when you disagree with me in good faith and trust that everything will still be OK. I hope that makes sense. Thanks again! I am glad to be working with you. ] (]) 18:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::got that --] (]) 18:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::great. i really value you as a colleague here. but we never want people to feel ganged up on (or be ganged up on) and if gandydancer (who likes you a lot) read what you wrote you above (and she may do.. i don't know if she watches my page or not) it would make her feel bad, even though you were trying to be good to me. and nobody deserves to be made to feel bad. i know you wouldn't want to make anybody feel bad. that's why we need to be careful of the "pack" thing and just be honest with each other. thanks again, it does feel good to know that you share the position i am taking in that specific thread. ] (]) 18:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} | |||
Still, must make a nice change to have somebody getting your back, rather than getting ''on'' your back ;-) ] (]) 18:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::I changed it (just in case)--] (]) 18:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::you just made me laugh out loud. thx :) ] (]) 19:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Watchdog == | |||
I have moved the notes about the "contentious" Atrazine article to the Atrazine talk page. I look forward to your comments there as we work to get that publication added, I have a few more I'd like to add to the page so this will be a good test run. Thanks! Remember: filter your water! Especially if you are prego. Apparently we midwesetrners are swamped in this chemical waste runoff. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Learning articles == | |||
I think these are now off of your radar, but FYI I heard from the professor who had students editing ] and ]. He was happy to find out about WikiEdu and I've forwarded your summary of the issues (with a bit more generalized information). Don't know if that means anything will change in the near future, but at least next semester they will likely work with us. Thanks. --] (]) 19:33, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:thanks for sticking with it! hooray!! ] (]) 19:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Requesting help with a redirected page. == | |||
Hey there. | |||
A wiki search for Trinity Baptist Church in Concord, NH is currently redirected to | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Trinity_Baptist_Church_Sex_Scandal&redirect=no | |||
This was due to a move or rename. I'm assuming the latter. Is it possible to edit the original page so that there is content germane to the current state of this organization? I am not looking to bury any of the current information contained in the above mentioned wiki. There is other information that can be posted and accessed by the community. | |||
Thanks, | |||
] (]) 20:30, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:this is your only edit, ever. pretty savvy of you to find me! | |||
:The article used to be called ] and then it was called ] and then someone objected that the article wasn't about the church at all, but about the sex scandal, so we changed the title to specifically reference the sex scandal. There doesn't seem to be enough material for an article about the church itself; we checked at the time. It would still be overwhelmed by the sex scandal content. It isn't clear exactly what the problem you see is... what is it that you want? ] (]) 20:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I'm in the research field. Finding things is what I do! Honestly, I just looked at the edits and figured you'd be a good place to start since you had "Revert Rights". | |||
::I don't necessarily have a problem with the scandal page. The church needs to have a wiki that gives facts about their history, past leadership, ministries, etc. The scandal would obviously be it's own section and link to this main article. | |||
::Another issue is that Google uses Wiki titles as business names in search results... Why? I don't know. But when you do a Google search for Trinity Baptist Church in Concord, NH, the business name is shown as Trinity Baptist Church Sex Scandal. I'm currently trying to reach out to Google to rectify this. | |||
::Thanks for your ultra-quick response. I also love your use of the ellipsis.] (]) 21:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::Hm. Let me ask you - what is your relationship with Trinity? It is fine if you are connected with it, but per our conflict of interest rules (like pretty much everywhere else), things go better when people with conflicts are transparent about them So, do tell. (and to be frank, since you are putting in all this effort to rectify things with google and Misplaced Pages, it will be a bit hard to believe if you tell me that you have no connection at all). | |||
::::But back to the point... above you write: "The church needs to have a wiki that gives facts about their history, past leadership, ministries, etc". That is not how Misplaced Pages works. We have policies that govern whether an article about X can exist in Misplaced Pages or not. That policy is here: ]. As I mentioned above, when we looked at this a month or so ago, it was clear to us that the church itself was unlikely to meet the standards described in that policy. This is what drove the name change. The article used to be named after the church, and had a window dressing of poor content about the church, draped around the sex scandal content... and this made no sense. (You can see what it looked like .) (the title was different then, of course). Does the decision to change the name make sense to you, now that you see the policy, and what the content was, and the decision we made? | |||
::::Sorry about the issues with Google - I hope they can fix that for you. 21:30, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::Full Disclosure, I'm not a member of Trinity and I have no COI. I recently started attending and with my background as a User Experience Designer was approached with helping them update their website with more relevant content. In doing research and finding this wiki article, I thought I would try to help them get more of their core information into the Wiki article. I understand the need for notability but this need is not applied evenly across Misplaced Pages. See the Wiki on the There are multiple churches and organizations that have wiki pages that aren't notable except for some sort of controversy but they have content relating to history, etc. This is not to diminish the scandal at Trinity but rather, to prove a point and to request parity. | |||
::::::The original intent of Misplaced Pages may have been to be an open-source encyclopedia. However, one of the standard uses of Misplaced Pages is the general gathering of knowledge about an institution. I've seen it happen time and time again. If you ask a user to tell you something about a company, they will go to the wiki as often (or even more often) than visiting said company's actual website. | |||
::::::I expressed multiple times to church leadership the need to have the scandal as part of the wiki as it is notable and of public record. Not to mention, the way to build genuine trust is NOT to bury information. As I said before, my main goal is to get more of their information into the article. It is not to make a dark stain disappear. | |||
::::::Thanks again.] (]) 21:56, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}} thanks for the disclosure, that makes sense. (i really do appreciate it. this place ''is'' a community at its base and it is good when folks are straight with one another). so what you (and I guess Trinity) want, is that the article would go back to how it was , with its old name. Is that right? ] (]) 22:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::If that could happen, that would be great. There is other content that could be added to the wiki I would just need to research it a bit more to be able to cite sources. But at least changing the title and adding the history would square Google away. I don't know if you've ever had to deal with them on an internal basis but that cog turns real, real slow. | |||
:::Thanks so much for your consideration around this topic.] (]) 00:28, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::I just wanted to clarify what you wanted. I am not sure that folks will want to do it, but it has to start with a clear description of what you want. OK, my next question to you, is - what sources do you have, about Trinity, that would be used to flesh out the rest of the article? What we want are independent (not Trinity's website for example), reliable sources about Trinity (again, please see ]). What do you have? You can put links here, or citations to books. ] (]) 00:38, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::As I said before, that would have to be researched so that ambiguity can be avoided and proper citations given however, upon second thought, I don't really have a dog in that hunt. My services have been requested in a different area. I will be sure to pass off all requirements so that the additions can be made. That being said, additions might include their weekly radio broadcast<ref>http://concordnewsradio.com/?page_id=567</ref> but like I said, content and citations is their baby, not mine.] (]) 01:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::no, we need independent sources. their radio show is not indepedent of them. the argument to rename is not going to go far, without some sense that there is actually decent, sourceable content to use. i will give it at try though, by linking to this conversation at the article Talk page. ] (]) 01:16, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{od}}I truly appreciate the effort. Like I said, I will let it to the Trinity leadership to provide the additional content/citations. I'll post their findings here for peer review before attempting to revamp the article. I'm done for the night. Take care.] (]) 01:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
== Thx 4 thx == | |||
Thanks for your thanks re GMO edits. Can I solicit your opinion on whether the Marsh vs Baxter case warrants a separate article? I think it does and am looking for an appropriate title. In Western Australia, there is an issue that "organic" farm produce sells for much higher prices than "mined" crops and "battery" animals, etc, and that there is a large potential export market if the chemicals and patent technologies can be kept at bay. Like yourself (as I understand), I have no vested interest either way but do like to see a rational discussion. Regards ] (]) 03:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:I think that would be an interesting article, yes! For examples from other countries, see ] (canada), ] (US). thanks for fixing the typo (embarassing) and improving otherwise. ] (]) 03:19, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Regarding .global page == | |||
My apologies. I added more sources as requested, and I am involved with the registry operating the TLD and got notified by the lack of content on the page that one of our resellers linked to from it's site. I hope the added sources and aparse content is ok now. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:19, 2 April 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Thanks for replying, {{u|Jeasoderlund}}. It sounds like you do have a conflict of interest. You should disclose that conflict on your userpage (]) and refrain from editing the article directly going forward, and instead suggest changes on its talk page, using the "request edit" template described in our ] guideline. I have also placed a text-box on the Talk page of .global (] so that with one click, you can set up an edit request. Thanks, and good luck! ] (]) 19:43, 2 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Conflict of interest == | |||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|]|]}} | |||
|rowspan="2" | | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Integrity''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I've provided pro-bono advice to a couple organizations recently, that ended up being helped by you on-Wiki. After warning them of the un-professional and chaotic nature of Misplaced Pages, I was duly impressed by your reasonable responses and willingness to invest the time in actually editing articles. After making my own COIN post, I took a look at the board to see that none other than Jytdog was practically single-handedly holding down the fort. I was somewhat on the opposite side of you in the discussion about the COI of someone writing about their father scientist, and after investigating the sources closely, you turned out to be right. Given this and seeing Request Edits being handled competently and search results for promotional phrases that I use to trim promotionalism coming down, I'm starting to have renewed faith in Misplaced Pages's ability to competently handle both good faith and bad faith COI in a drama-free manner. In case nobody else has noticed your good work yet, I figured somebody should. ] (]) 20:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
:That is super nice of you corporateM. three or four other folks are doing things regularly there - it is not just me. i do wish there were more. but thanks! ] (]) 20:13, 3 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Warning about your incivility... == | |||
Per my comment here you have been warned. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 16:33, 4 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:please tell me what I wrote that was incivil there. Thanks. ] (]) 16:42, 4 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::All of it. Just start striking the entire post because it is filled with unsupported allegations: . I have grown weary of you discrediting me and making it appear as though I support a drug that is banned by the FDA. That accusation alone is actionable because it is based only on your incorrect assumptions which are totally unsupported by the diffs. For example, the natural news link was a RS to cite for content in Griffin's '''book''', and has nothing to do with what I support or believe. Griffin wrote the freaking book, not me. You seem to have a problem understanding what makes a source reliable; i.e. how it is used. The passages I wrote at Griffin (that you reverted) focused on the author and his books. I took a biographical approach to what was written in his books including his views and motivations. Per BLP: {{xt|Articles should document in a non-partisan manner what reliable secondary sources have published about the subjects, '''and in some circumstances what the subjects have published about themselves.'''}} FYI, ] further confirms it. Let me be clear for the umpteenth time, '''I am not promoting laetrile''', and if you don't strike your false allegations, you best start compiling some diffs. I've asked you politely on numerous occasions to please stop making false allegations and to stop policing me. We are allowed to write about an author's views, especially his most controversial ones, and we shouldn't have to contend with other editors creating false impressions that we support those views. You need to stop it now, Jytdog. I have run out of options and don't know how else to stop your bad behavior short of ARBCOM. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 18:48, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::policing you? i have no idea what you mean. i avoid you as much as i can. Ok you have now made it clear that you object to me saying that you were promoting laetrile. Let me see if i actually wrote. If i did, i will strike that. Thanks for clarifying. ] (]) 19:17, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::so , was "In that article, you been trying for months now to remove MEDRS-sourced content critical of the use of amygdalin as a cancer treatment, and instead to write more positive content based on sources like naturalnews.com. " I think that is an accurate description. I also wrote there, "'l'll end this by noting that the promotion of amygdalin as a cancer treatment is actually called quackery in the reliable biomedical literature (PMID 219680). There is quacking here, but it is not financial, but rather advocacy for FRINGE medicine." If you read that carefully, I did not say that you were promoting laetrile. I didn't intend to say that you were, and I am sorry that you read it that way. | |||
::::i didn't see anything about you promoting laetrile . | |||
::: in the deletion discussion, i "This specific realization of that idea, is actually an effort to create a tool to allow COI to be used as a cudgel to get FRINGE health claims into WP", which I later to say "<u>appears to me to be</u> <s>is actually</s> an effort to create a tool to allow COI to be used as a cudgel to get FRINGE health claims into WP". . ] (]) 20:19, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
* completely out of left field... i of the Griffin article in reaction to your trying to edit war in, the that Alexbrn linked to, on SV's page. I re-read that edit you made. The content about laetrile (commenting only on that part) is actually not bad. No naturalnews.com or other flakey sources. if the tenor of the relationship among editors on the Talk page would change, I could see the article ending up not ~too~ far from there. But on the other hand, even the you are ''still'' arguing to include content like that on the MSKCC website... so i guess your perspective hasn't changed that much.. and arguing for that, really is arguing for FRINGE, against MEDRS. I had actually amended what I wrote on the basis of the edit Alexbrn linked to, but due to the stance you are still taking at RfC, I just undid that. I am comfortable with what i wrote. ] (]) 20:19, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I understand your view and agree with the principal of MEDRS as it relates specifically to the substance or drug, but not with its misapplication as it relates to biographical material about an author, including why that chose to write about a particular topic, which is what was censored in Griffin based on MEDRS. If information about the author is RS (which includes self-published material about himself) it should not be censored based on the assumption that MEDRS applies to every single statement in a BLP. In fact, FRINGEBLP guidelines which includes how it applies to BLP policy actually supports mention of such topics as long as it is not given undue. Allowing editors to censor an author's literary work is neither NPOV, nor is it an encyclopedic approach to writing biographies. To begin, there is a disclaimer about laetrile in the introduction of the book. Griffin wrote about the substance based on what was published by medical authorities and scientists who '''were''' mainstream at the time but were subsequently disproven. I cited published academic papers as well as scientific papers about that controversy all of which were deleted as were other RS including what is published today regarding the way ACS and NIH approaches the topic. The BLP begs to be updated and expanded with balanced, NPOV, RS '''biographical''' material. | |||
::I think one of the most important things we must guard against is the profound censorship of important information relevant to the overall context of an article, especially when the purpose of doing so is to push a particular POV. It is an egregious act and challenges the very nature of the project's encyclopedic intent. Censorship not only short changes our readers from acquiring information that should be included, it may also pave the way for a BLP to become a coatrack or attack page. In Griffin's situation, the BLP appears to be nothing short of a coatrack for the purpose of condemning laetrile (which should be sourced to updated reports by the FDA, ACS, and NIH), but at the same time, censorship should not prevent the author's views from being included which were cited by other RS. Did POV advocacy play a role in censoring the author's political beliefs? Was FRINGE misapplied to justify censoring everything else relating to the author's views from a biographical perspective? Ironically, the answers depend on one's POV. I also don't think ] should apply to a BLP. | |||
::As long as the relative PAGs are vague, COI and advocacy issues will continue as will the TE and incivility born of those topics. It is not about whether you or I disagree. It is about finding resolve through clarity and NPOV. Advocacy poisons the well, and to quote Davis, ''conflict of interest is like "dirt in a sensitive gauge".'' How can one realistically eliminate all doubt about an individual's intent if they are a self-proclaimed "quack buster" or "skeptic"? From a political bent, what about those who proclaim their dislike for progressives and liberals or vice versa via the use of polemic user boxes or otherwise proclaim their political leaning, alma mater, sports team, etc.? It would be foolish to expect liberals to not collaborate on articles about conservatism because it creates a COI...unless they are on the payroll of George Soros, and the same would apply in reverse to conservatives on the payroll of the Koch Bros. How do we prevent unpaid advocacy groups from pushing their agendas in situations where they simply outnumber us and are perceived to reflect the views of the ''community'', regardless of whether fewer but more experienced editors perceive it to be noncompliant with NPOV? What solutions do you propose to seasoned editors who recognize that BLP vios exist as do NPOV vios in other articles but can't/won't do anything about it because of the COI duck behaviors described in the essay? | |||
PS: Regarding your response above about your disparaging remarks, I totally disagree, and have made note of your response. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 17:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:: Just two questions for starters: | |||
:: 1) who, working at the Griffin article, do you believe has a COI? | |||
:: 2) what leads you to think that? ] (]) 17:53, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Collapsed discussion == | |||
No offense intended. The discussion over there has remained admirably focused given the contentious nature of the subject matter, and I was just trying to maintain that. Respectfully, ] <sup>]|]|]</sup> 00:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:understood, thanks. ] (]) 00:59, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Abuse of warning == | |||
You are hereby advised that your accusation of canvassing at my TP and at the user's TP was inappropriate and constitutes an abuse of warning. As I explained to you here , my efforts were about collaboration. You also need to evaluate your own behavior because it is certainly beginning to smell like hounding. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 17:39, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
: wasn't abuse. if you do only contact one side of a content dispute, that is canvassing. maybe you are not done notifying people about the essay and intend to content people on all sides of the discussions at ]; if you did or do that, that would not be canvassing. you will do as you will. (btw I watch Gudzwabofer's page, as i have had lots of discussions with him; your edit popped up on my watchlist - no hunting or hounding involved. ] (]) 17:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::It was abuse. I am following guidelines, per ]. My invitation reads: {{xt|Hi, Gudz (hope the nickname is ok), I am working on improving the following essay, WP:COIducks, and during my research to find areas of behavioral conflict, I ended up at Talk:Naturopathy where I read some of your posts. Since CAM, integrative and alternative medicine are mentioned in the essay, would you be so kind as to give it a read, and offer any suggestions at the essay's TP? Thx in advance.}} My response to the questions and comments preceding it further proves my course of action as inviting collaboration: {{xt|Evidentiary material can be easily researched, some of which can be found in the archives of AN, ANI, ARBCOM, AE, and on numerous TPs of related topics. It's all there for your perusal as it was for me. Just curious, do you think it is not an issue? One way to gage stability and issues with an article is to check traffic history, disputes, reverts/undos, edit warring, stability of an article, etc.}} I have no clue why you would accuse me of canvassing. Stop it. <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 19:22, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::: we seem to disagree here. i do hope you notify other editors at ] of this essay, as they are also knowledgeable about that topic. ] (]) 19:26, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::: Atsme, it looks to me as if you repeatedly deny the clearly, civilly, and appropriately expressed concerns of other editors by accusing them of "abuse." ]] 20:10, 5 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::No worry, Jytdog. I finally have a collaborator, and good one to boot!! He added some really nice touches to the essay. It looks great. Question - since the essay is sort of an extension of COI guidelines, shouldn't the participants in the survey claim or acknowledge their COI statements if they have one on their UP? Since the essay is about identifying problem areas of COI, every participant in the survey with a COI statement needs to disclose it, including you according to the guidelines, right? <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 03:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::{{tq|"sort of an extension of COI guidelines"}} ← no, it's a user essay with no guideline weight whatsoever. Even so, it's so toxic it is (deservedly) going to get deleted. ] (]) 03:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::If anyone has a COI they should disclose it yes, and that would go for me too. Why do you ask? ] (]) 04:09, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Bloke walks into "the Ferret and Dramaboard" pub and says "What's the difference between a COI and a COI statement?" -] (]) 04:15, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
Ok, so if they have already published a COI statement on their UP, and they participate in an article where there may be a COI, are they supposed to indicate they have a published COI statement (like a link) somewhere in the discussion, or in the edit summary, or ???? <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 13:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::::<sup>The boardtender replies, one is true the other may not be.</sup> ] <font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">]</font><font color="gold">☯</font>] 13:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::::<sup>The very hard issue is determining what is true about whether someone has a COI. We have no way on WP to know for sure. People even lie about being someone who would have a conflict. -see the recent history of ] - someone was impersonating her. There is a real epistemological problem here - "we see through a glass darkly" if you want to work on COI issues in WP, you need to take that '''very seriously'''. Ditto OUTING and everything it stands for (which is deep in the guts of WP) ] (]) 14:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC) </sup> | |||
:::::::::*now i understand your question. There are two levels to this - Terms of Use per, and COI more generally. The Terms of Use are very explicit, about where you need to make disclosures if you are editing for pay. Doing any one of those, satisfies the ToU. In practice, we have been trying to get folks to disclose both on their User page, so we have a central location to see everything so we can better audit, and on the Talk page of the relevant article (we do that, with the "connected contributor" template). I have to note here, that although the ToU is a legal contract, there is no consensus in WP to take them as policy, and Arbcom has said that because there is no consensus to take it as policy, they will not act on ToU violations, as Arbcom cannot itself make policy. For matters that fall outside the ToU (COi without paid editing) it is murkier. What COI actually says, is "They are also encouraged to disclose their interest on their user pages and on the talk page of the article in question". COI is "just" a guideline, but people that part of it pretty seriously. I am not aware of anyone getting blocked for refusing to do that, though. | |||
::::::::: *broader note... b/c COI is not policy and working on it steps very close to OUTING, it needs to be handled thoughtfully, with discretion, and by persuasion more than with a stick. People with a COI who have action taken against them here, have that action taken on the basis of violations of policies or guidelines that are very near to being policy, like MEDRS. In my experience (and while i have a lot it is not exhaustive) most editors want to be "good". You can work with folks like that, and the work is persuading them of the goodness of complying with COI. It can be done. Conflicted editors who don't care about WP, end up getting swiftly indeffed for policy violations. Super recent example (just this morning) check out ] and that user's contribs, and you will see what I mean. There are cases like wifione, though... those are hard. | |||
::::::::: *all that said, editors who really want to be transparent (a sign of a good Wikipedian), include a link to their COI declarations in their signatures, to make it super easy to see and avoid the problem of people ever not knowing about it and being upset about that. This is really the best practice. ] (]) 14:07, 6 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Thanks == | |||
Hi Jytdog, just wanted to thank you for your further attempts to reason with said user about Russ Martin. As you can see, I tried to be nice to him and explain in detail on my talk page. Sadly he responded with personal attacks. Hopefully he will come around. Best, --<font color="#082567">]</font> <sub><font color="#008999">]</font></sub><sup><font color="#E3A857">]</font></sup> 10:00, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:sure.. advocacy is similar to COI and i deal with the latter a lot. happy to help. ] (]) 10:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::To be honest, I would probably argue he ''does'' have a conflict of interest. He actually admitted to being a donor to the subject's foundation, which is pretty stark to me. Anyways, that's beside the point. Let's see how it plays out. Fingers crossed things will calm down now. --<font color="#082567">]</font> <sub><font color="#008999">]</font></sub><sup><font color="#E3A857">]</font></sup> 10:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::: COI gets thrown around too loosely - it has a specific meaning in WP. If you haven't read them and thought about them, please do read ] and ]. ] (]) 10:08, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::: I've been editing Misplaced Pages since June 2010. I'm well aware of Misplaced Pages's definition of conflict of interest: "When an external relationship undermines, or could reasonably be said to undermine, your role as a Wikipedian, you have a conflict of interest." I would reasonably say that a donor to a foundation who is clearly editing in a bias manner does exhibit a conflict of interest. Anyways, as I previously said, I think this is beside the point. Let's just see how things pan out, and hope this editor sees some sense. All the best, --<font color="#082567">]</font> <sub><font color="#008999">]</font></sub><sup><font color="#E3A857">]</font></sup> 10:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::: you and i agree that he is an advocate and that this is a problem. we don't need to agree on the COI part, i reckon. ] (]) 10:22, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
::::::: Agreed! Let's just keep our eyes on this. --<font color="#082567">]</font> <sub><font color="#008999">]</font></sub><sup><font color="#E3A857">]</font></sup> 10:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Diabetes Mellitus / Medications == | |||
User jytdog, | |||
Why do you think it is edit war on medications? I am adding useful information to the section with reliable references. You want the section to talk about anti-inflammatory drug Aspirin but not an oral anti-hyperglycemic, Sulphonyl urea, why ? I am , to say the least, intrigued. Although there is a long separate article on anti-diabetic medications , I believe, we have to make some mention of different classes of medication on this page too. Please tell me what your specific objections are ? You removed, uncited text, fine but now I have included information from peer reviewed journals with citations? Is there anything that I have missed ? Thanks.] (]) 15:32, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
: replied at talk page. thanks! ] (]) 17:53, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== False accusations of edit warring == | |||
Please dont jump down my throat and accuse me of edit warring just because i do a single revert. | |||
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Neuropathic_pain&diff=655380815&oldid=655380571 | |||
I see on you talk page you have been accused of incivility on previous occasions.--] (]) 19:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
: i have made no false accusations. you added content, i reverted, you reverted without discussion. That is edit warring. ] (]) 19:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
== I strongly resent your COI smear here == | |||
]. I have neuropathic pain and have researched about a dozen different possible treatments. Scrambler device recently came to my attention and noticed there wasn't a Misplaced Pages article for it so i thought it was worth doing. Pleaee withdraw your smear immediately.--] (]) 19:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 12:10, 20 April 2024
Hi, welcome to my talk page!
|
Archives |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
That's all folks
So... I made a very bad error in judgement, and called a person who had added raw advocacy content to WP, who is clearly deeply passionate about the topic.
The call went very badly. I shouldn't have called them, I shouldn't have allowed it to become an argument, and I shouldn't have ended the call the way I did.
In the past, I violated the OUTING policy by posting off-WP information here. That was also a terrible error in judgement.
I also have generally been pretty aggressive in trying to maintain high quality in our content, and this has caused some people here to dislike and distrust me, and per the last ANI about me, there is weariness in the community with me.
In the current situation, there is rampant speculation about a three minute conversation and about my intentions. There is some fierce debate about the boundaries of the harassment policy. There are a lot of angry people. Probably hours have been spent, that could have been better spent elsewhere actually building the encyclopedia.
It looks like this will become a case, which will mean many more hours. The outcome of that case if pretty foregone, in my view. I see no good reason to put everybody through more of this.
So, I am out of here. I am scrambling my WP password and deleting my gmail account and "Jytdog" will cease to do anything, anywhere. If you see any other Jytdog doing stuff in the future, anywhere, it is not me. (And no, I will be not be coming back here as a sock.) I urge Arbcom to do just do a motion and indef or site ban me.
I just want to say thanks to everybody I have worked with, and I wish you all, and our beautiful project, the best. Jytdog (talk) 16:52, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Dammit man. -Roxy, the naughty dog. wooF 17:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- That is not a foregone conclusion. Do as you will, but the case will surely go on anyway. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:03, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Very sad to hear it. Like Tryptofish says, Arbcom is not a foregone conclusion, but you should do what you think best. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- The frustrations for Arbcom and you are understandable, but the overall mission of the project – and your obvious love of and value to it – should not be hastily dismissed. Give yourself a 2 week break, then re-evaluate... and return with a fresh outlook. --Zefr (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Sad to see this. Best wishes,Smeat75 (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- +1 to what Zefr said. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:44, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Another +1 here. Nobody is irreplaceable but Misplaced Pages would be much worse off without you, Jytdog. All best wishes to you, whatever you decide to do. -- bonadea contributions talk 3:17 am, 4 December 2018, last Tuesday (3 days ago) (UTC+9)
- And another +1 here.--Iztwoz (talk) 10:41, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- The frustrations for Arbcom and you are understandable, but the overall mission of the project – and your obvious love of and value to it – should not be hastily dismissed. Give yourself a 2 week break, then re-evaluate... and return with a fresh outlook. --Zefr (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Very sad to hear it. Like Tryptofish says, Arbcom is not a foregone conclusion, but you should do what you think best. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- That is not a foregone conclusion. Do as you will, but the case will surely go on anyway. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:03, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Jytdog The whole episode is a storm in a teacup. I am sad to see you going dude. The place will be worse without you. Take care mate. scope_creep 18:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I understand your motivations in doing this, but I would encourage you not to burn all the bridges as such. By all means, take a wikibreak as Zefr suggests (even a longer one, if you want), feel free even to sit out the arbcom case, but perhaps reconsider your account abandonment. I can speak from personal experience that it is easy to mess up in pushing the boundaries of best practices at this website. That's part of the design, and pushing out people who are effective in their designs is also a prototypical feature of societies that are run by the kinds of mob rule that Misplaced Pages employs (see ostracism). Taking time away from this website in such scenarios can provide much needed perspective (it has for me, certainly), but I think your general outlook on what is or is not appropriate here with respect to the way we report on various claims and promotions is one that is needed. Crucially,WP:There is no deadline, and it would be great to have you back after some time spent in the wilderness. jps (talk) 18:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'll echo this and Zefr at the least Jytdog. I've gone the route you outlined of scrambling password, deleting email, etc. when deciding to quite a particular haunt of the internet. Sometimes it really is better to go cold turkey, but I'd suggest in this case go up to everything but deleting the email until a time later. That still gives you the option to come back after a month or whatever, but I always felt like I had more closure waiting a bit for that final step even in the cases when I really did decide to be done.
- That being said, remember that ArbCom does not have the authority to give out a site ban in this particular instance yet as they are still bound by WP:PREVENTATIVE policy. The most that can be done is an indef topic-ban on anything relating to real-life identities of Misplaced Pages editors. Anything beyond that would violate blocking policy in part considering you already made it clear you weren't going to be doing this again (before the initial block). A site-ban/indef-block can't comply with policy yet unless a likelihood for disruption outside the COI/real-life identity area appeared likely or that you violated such a topic ban at a later date. It can only be applied when it's clear an editor is going to have issues no matter the topic they go into. This doesn't need to be the end of the road, but I can understand just wanting to be done with all the drama too. Kingofaces43 (talk) 20:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just fyi, they do have the authority. And they are a lot more likely to pull the trigger if they do it by motion. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I'm saying they only have the authority in the situations I outlined above. There's nothing preventative about a site-ban unless a case can be made that staying out of real life identity areas wouldn't be enough to prevent disruption. Basically, one can argue at most the WP:ROPE has been depleted for that area. My opinion is such a topic-ban should be done as while Jytdog does have some troubles in the area for all the good they've done, the mix of community tension with COI, etc. along with a history of pot-stirring by some problematic editors still hounding Jytdog just makes the area a tough fit for Jytdog. The site level is going outside the bounds of policy at this time though. That's as much as I'm going to comment here about that though. My point is that if Jytdog decides to come back after a good break, they still have tons of areas they should be able to edit. Kingofaces43 (talk) 21:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- You've just been proven wrong at the case page. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm staying out of the general issue, but I'd like to point out that someone saying they will do something is not the same thing as someone actually doing it. Otherwise there arbcom would have little to do, and we as a community will issue few cbans etc. Plenty of people say they will do something, whether or not they actually do so is a different matter. And this isn't simply about sincerity. I'm sure quite a few people who make such promises are sincere when they make the promise, but still fail to uphold it abjectly. Again I'm staying out of the general issue, since I have no idea of the evidence as I haven't looked, and it's unlikely I would ever fully know anyway since some of it is likely to be private so I'm not saying this applies to Jytdog. I'm simply pointing out it's entirely possible a block would have been preventative not simply because Jytdog may have made problems in other areas but because they may have been unable to actually do what they said they would do or were asked to do. Nil Einne (talk) 19:38, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, the context I was talking about was that the block was not preventative compared to a topic ban, which did work when it was in effect and should of been reinstated in terms of WP:ROPE before a full site ban. That's all moot now though unless Jytdog decides to come back though. Kingofaces43 (talk) 19:41, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I'm saying they only have the authority in the situations I outlined above. There's nothing preventative about a site-ban unless a case can be made that staying out of real life identity areas wouldn't be enough to prevent disruption. Basically, one can argue at most the WP:ROPE has been depleted for that area. My opinion is such a topic-ban should be done as while Jytdog does have some troubles in the area for all the good they've done, the mix of community tension with COI, etc. along with a history of pot-stirring by some problematic editors still hounding Jytdog just makes the area a tough fit for Jytdog. The site level is going outside the bounds of policy at this time though. That's as much as I'm going to comment here about that though. My point is that if Jytdog decides to come back after a good break, they still have tons of areas they should be able to edit. Kingofaces43 (talk) 21:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just fyi, they do have the authority. And they are a lot more likely to pull the trigger if they do it by motion. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:24, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- That being said, remember that ArbCom does not have the authority to give out a site ban in this particular instance yet as they are still bound by WP:PREVENTATIVE policy. The most that can be done is an indef topic-ban on anything relating to real-life identities of Misplaced Pages editors. Anything beyond that would violate blocking policy in part considering you already made it clear you weren't going to be doing this again (before the initial block). A site-ban/indef-block can't comply with policy yet unless a likelihood for disruption outside the COI/real-life identity area appeared likely or that you violated such a topic ban at a later date. It can only be applied when it's clear an editor is going to have issues no matter the topic they go into. This doesn't need to be the end of the road, but I can understand just wanting to be done with all the drama too. Kingofaces43 (talk) 20:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Well that ended badly :-( Take care. You did great work well you were here. Hope you will rejoin us one day. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:34, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I have done plenty of stupid things here too and I really do need you to keep me honest ;-) So get back on the horse! But seriously, please take a well deserved break and reflect. Reiterating Doc James, I hope you will rejoin us. Boghog (talk) 19:55, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I consider this a serious loss for the project. I guess I understand why you would want to leave, but I nevertheless hope that you'll reconsider at some time in the future -- even though there will be some hurdles you'd have to get over if the current motion passes. In the meantime, I wish you all the best. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- We have had a lot of different interactions, but I believe you made a mistake and it was not malicious, and I think You should rethink this. Misplaced Pages would be worse off without you. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 21:49, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I can't imagine what you're going through, and how bad you must feel. This is a community here, and I know you feel community with a lot of the people, whether you've met them or not, and that will be a further loss. You must feel like crap, and that's understandable. You didn't do the worst thing in the world, and the project still needs you. Decisions made at the peak of emotion aren't always the best ones. You get to decide how to lead your life so the deicsion is yours, but I hope you will take the two-week break or whatever feels right to you, and then revisit the situation. You would be welcomed back. Feels like there's a Jytdog-shaped hole in the Misplaced Pages jigsaw puzzle of a community right now, and there's only one person that can fill it. Enjoy your break, and hope to see you back here. Mathglot (talk) 22:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I've been feeling like I want to say something more, and I've been wavering over exactly what to say, but Mathglot just said it better than I could have. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- 🙁 Mathglot puts it very well. I don't like to see a Jytdog-shaped hole in Misplaced Pages either. Bishonen | talk 23:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC).
- It's sad that your huge passion for the project has resulted in this. Thanks for your tireless efforts in making the project neutral. If it's goodbye here, then enjoy your free time until you find your next passion! SmartSE (talk) 23:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- We've had interesting discussions on how to work with people, particularly those with a COI. While some of your approaches have been questionable, I for one have never had any doubts concerning your commitment to ensuring neutrality and quality of content on WP. This is a great loss for the 'pedia. --Blackmane (talk) 00:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Desiderata--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 00:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am so sorry to see this. What's done is done, but you may consider making a clean start in a few months, and I hope you would be welcomed. Take care. Jonathunder (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your edits on the alternative medicine related articles. You should take a break and come back here in the future under a new name. Skeptic from Britain (talk) 02:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Your positive work is appreciated. best regards, —tim /// Carrite (talk) 03:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- WP:You are not irreplaceable and WP:Misplaced Pages does not need you are not always true, and I've been considering creating a WP:You are irreplaceable counter essay. You do so much for Misplaced Pages that others don't do. And even if someone else takes up the mantle, there will be some quality aspects missing because every editor is unique in one way or another. I thank you for all of the work you've done for this site, and for often being there for me. I hope to see your return in the future. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- User:Flyer22 Reborn I have been thinking the same thing. Our core community is irreplaceable. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- You've made a significant contribution: the quality of our content is much improved across many topics (especially medical) as the result of your hard work. Alexbrn (talk) 07:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- I will miss you and your thoughtful thoughts. Misplaced Pages:Why MEDRS? is one of my favourite essays here. You were there for Misplaced Pages at many times when we needed you. May the next chapter of your volunteer life be interesting and happy for you, wherever you may go. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 07:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am sad to learn of your departure, I thank you for all your contributions, and I wish you the very best going forward. Cullen Let's discuss it 08:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- I was trying to compose a comment at ArbCom and could not really get past, "Well, fuck." Please know that I have learned a very great deal from working with you, knowledge and skills I will continue to carry forward, as I know many others do as well; in that sense and many more, your impact on the site will be long-lasting. I hope you don't mind my saying, I also really admire you as a person, because over time, I saw how willing you were to reconsider and make real, hard-earned adjustments to your approach. That level of character is not something you see every day. I know this episode must be a painful ending, but I recognize in your choice for how to conclude it what I know you do too--an only-increasing thoughtfulness about how you can best contribute to the project and avoid becoming more disruptive than constructive, even if what that requires in a given moment is hardly the thing I know you'd prefer. I have no doubt you'll find another good use for your talent in the near-term, and if eventually it's your judgment that your return would serve the project, well, I'll look forward to it. I will be wishing you the very, very best in the meantime. Innisfree987 (talk) 08:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just to say, I was edit-conflicted by four other well-wishers trying to post this! You will very much be missed. Innisfree987 (talk) 08:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- I want to add myself to the list of people who are grateful for all the good work you've done here and to tell you that you'll be missed. I hope you do come back some day, in some form. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for all of your help over the years. I'm not sure which side of the fence you might fall on so let me just say "Live long and prosper" and "May the Force be with you". -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Awful news. You're one of the few people on this website I hold in extremely high regard.💵Money💵emoji💵 14:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Please, don't pull the trigger just yet. By all means give yourself a break if you need it. Do something else for a while. Ignore this place and allow the drama processes to grind through as they will. Then reconsider if you could simply accept some boundaries and then resume making your hugely constructive contributions within those boundaries. This will be a lesser place without you.LeadSongDog come howl! 18:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just another voice in the crowd. The volume and quality of the work you've done here speaks for itself; you've been inspirational. Plus what Mathglot said. GirthSummit (blether) 18:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- The project is weaker, and will quickly become even weaker, without you. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 22:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- You have dedicated a lot of your time to improve the project and made thousands of valuable contributions. But yes, the word "aggressive" that you used above to describe your behaviour is unfortunately consistent with my observations and experience, and as I noticed many complaints at ANI. Your attitude drove me away from wikiediting for months on more than one occassion. You are a very knowledgeable person with amazing breadth of knowledge. I encourage you not to leave the project for good – rather, consider taking an extended wikibreak, and then come back to the project, possibly with a friendlier, more supportive and more tolerant attitude. Best, — kashmīrī 00:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Do you hear the support. All is voluntary here and the decision is yours. Eschoryii (talk) 02:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for your countless valuable contributions and your obvious dedication to improve this project. I can't really comment about the actual issue, but I agree with others' thoughts about a Wikibreak as a possible chance to reflect on stuff. GermanJoe (talk) 02:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for all you've done. You have improved the encyclopedia greatly. Your presence will be missed and I join the chorus suggesting a break and return in a while. Best. MrBill3 (talk) 03:51, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for all your work and help. I hope you'll be back. Take care. --Ronz (talk) 04:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for all the help, guidance, and outright inspiration you have offered us Jytdog. I wish you the best in your future endeavors, whatever they may be. SamHolt6 (talk) 04:54, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Doc James and Mathglot summed it up. Unfortunate that things turned out this way. Thank you for your contributions to the project. You have stated that you plan never to return, so I wish you the best in your future endeavors. --TheSandDoctor 16:23, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- :( – Joe (talk) 16:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure whether you'll (ever) see this but thanks for helping me over the last few year improving and updating many of the articles covering pharm and biotechs, it's been great to work with you, whenever our paths crossed. Like the tribute wall above, you'll be missed and I hope that there are editors out there who can take up your torch in ensuring that the quality of WP does not degrade and become filled with promotional bluster! I wish you the best outside of this project and hope one day you will somehow be able to return! XyZAn (talk) 18:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I obviously played a pretty significant part in this per my comments at WT:HA and the case request, but for what it's worth I'm sad to see this result. I was expecting that if this proceeded to a full Arbcom case that cooler heads would prevail, and that in light of your significant contributions to the project and with everything on the table, a reasonable solution (sanction, probably) could have been crafted which would have still allowed you to be part of this community. It seems that's not to be. Outside of the noticeboards I think our only significant interaction was in working on changes to the banning policy some years ago clarifying the scope of community ban discussions (approximately here and here), which I have always appreciated as one of the most rational and constructive discussions I have ever been involved with in almost a decade here even though we did not initially agree. I very rarely write notes to departing editors, but I share the view that regardless of this recent incident, Misplaced Pages will certainly be worse for your absence. Of course this project is voluntary, it wears down the best of us at times, and we must all do what is right for ourselves in the end. Whatever you decide, take care and best wishes. Ivanvector (/Edits) 20:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am sad to see things turned out this way for you, maybe, one day, you'll be back! Enjoy your retirement! Polyamorph (talk) 20:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not a prolific pedian by any stretch but I have always appreciated your stalwart work regarding keeping bullshit off of here. You were a dam against the never ending tide of anti-science filth that tried to infect our medical articles and I'm afraid that they will now be worse without you. It's a shame that Arbcom didn't avoid getting sucked up with the lynch mob. Be well. Valeince (talk) 21:34, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for all of your contributions here, Although we've never interacted I've always seen you around, Anyway I hope one day you come back but in the meantime take care and I wish you all the best, Take care, –Davey2010 22:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Rather selfishly I will miss your help on my little side project; the work you put into improving this previously unsourced little gem made the whole thing worthwhile. I sincerely hope that your post-wiki world is filled with minimal drama and maximum happiness. Best, -- Jezebel's Ponyo 23:53, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- In looking back on a conversation we had in 2013, I realized that I haven't encountered someone who has been willing to completely engage in such a detailed discussion in a long, long time. As someone who strongly believes in raising the civility bar on Misplaced Pages, I have mixed opinions about the entire situation, but I know you had good intentions and I felt like your tone and approach improved over time. Hope to see you back someday. II | (t - c) 02:18, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Well, Misplaced Pages just lost a valuable content contributor and one of its few safeguards against COI POV. The idea that this situation came about as a result of the community's response to a single well-intended but ill-advised phone call is just completely fucking asinine. Anyway, thanks for everything you did here Jytdog. I'm sorry to see you go. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 02:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- You have done excellent work here in developing our approach to COI--because of the effort you have put into it, we will be able to continue, and I for one, feel a specific need to try to compensate for your absence--especially because I was unable to prevent the arb com result, a I have been in other cases where I arb com proved susceptible to excessive self-reinforcing behavior. DGG ( talk ) 06:09, 6 December 2018 (UTC) -- and see below for what I will try to do in practice. DGG ( talk ) 08:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- I have created and added myself to the category, Category:Wikipedians who wish Jytdog would come back. Benjamin (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just noticed this, having being absent. I'm not wading through the history of the case but my sentiments are similar to those expressed by Bishonen above, who in turn agrees with Mathglot. - Sitush (talk) 00:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just saw this. No idea if you're still reading, but if so, know that you'll definitely be missed around here. Thank you for your guidance, your empathy, your generosity and your counsel over the years. Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the hard high quality work you have done, the vast majority of which will persist for years to come in our articles. You messed up, admitted it in your above post, accepted the outcome, that is good. Take a holiday to a tropical island with bikini clad women walking the beaches and chill out sipping a cocktail. Then find some new project or even hobby - something relaxing, doesn’t have to be academic, fishing even? I note the title of this section is “That’s all folks” - there is usually a sequel to that phrase on TV. I bought pajamas as a Christmas present for my special woman and on the front it has Mickey Mouse saying “Hey folks” and it made me think - that after six to twelve months you should appeal the block and come back and make a post titled “Hey folks”.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 12:53, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- I've been off-wiki for over a week, and just saw this info. I agree that an indef block and a long time away obviate a lengthy messy ArbCom case, which is probably good, but I feel that your importance to Misplaced Pages, and the numerous people attesting to that, should persuade you to return for an appeal and unblock request after six months to a year. I think the time away may calm down your over-enthusiasm, and allow bygones to be bygones. I'd like to thank you for all of your extensive COI work. Among other things, you were (ironically) the instigating force behind at least two very important and effective ArbCom cases, as well as a number of non-ArbCom cases of very extensive and complex webs of organized COI editing which spanned numerous noticeboards and talkpages. I think it's plain that you are a net positive, and that after time away you can and should return. Cheers, Softlavender (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Your contributions to handling COI issues have strengthend the project. You should return. Indviduals can be replaced, but dedication and skill take a long time to build. Please come up with a plan to take a role here again. If you feel frustrated with a problem, ask for advice, or, at least, a sounding board. I look forward to seeing your successful appeal in June. — Neonorange (Phil) 07:16, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- I posted some thoughts regarding this issue at special:diff/872116397#Statement_by_bluerasberry. Of course I do not want to see you go. Thanks for what you have done and happy future projects. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- We haven't always agreed, and at times your manner of interacting with others was highly irritating. But your record of accomplishment and contributions are a monument to your dedication to the project. I tip my hat and wish you fair winds and following seas wherever the ship of life takes you. Farewell. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Sad to see that such a prolific contributor had to leave. Hope you are reading this and will return back someday--DBigXrayᗙ 20:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- If any efforts are made to bring Jytdog back to the project in any capacity--please ping me as I would support. Personally, I feel like exceptions should be made for exceptional editors. Best wishes to Jytdog wherever you are TeeVeeed (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Oh my lord. I just started editing Misplaced Pages and you were always there on the articles around me. I knew something was going on, but I didn't understand the depth of it. Jytdog, you will be missed. Thank you for everything you've done and taught me. Dr-Bracket (talk) 16:23, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry to see you go. We didn't see eye to eye on every issue but I always respected your views and had a high opinion of your work against COI POV pushing. Reyk YO! 08:43, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- In my opinion it's disastrous to see you go. You are/were a breath of fresh air in Misplaced Pages.SylviaStanley (talk) 10:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- (just heard about this) Goddammit man. I'm in complete agreement with jps above, which says something. I sympathize and empathize with your description of what went down. Just want to say what you probably already know, which is that your insights, dedication and honesty have made a big difference around here, and to me specifically. Very few editors would've cared enough to wade through my perseverative walls of text, identify the wheat and chaff, and help sort it. You have a superb eye for both nuance and the big picture, which will continue to benefit the areas you focus on, and -- illegitimi non carborundum -- make them rewarding.
- I hope you have fulfilling and fortunate days ahead, and that if you ever want to, you come back exactly when, how and as you choose. (Inspirational verses/vibe: Bob Marley & the Wailers, "Coming In From The Cold"; lyrics.) Happy New Year & IRL-ing. --Middle 8 (t • c | privacy • acupuncture COI?) 10:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
- I just heard about this now. I feel sad. It was thrilling and rewarding to work with you on the BLP of our favorite errant statistician. You were tough, but also fair. I mourned your topic ban when it occurred, and now this. Happy hunting, in a place of your choice. Your contributions will be missed.--FeralOink (talk) 00:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- Wait, what? Apparently I somehow managed to miss all of this. Sorry to see you go, Jytdog. It will be strange to not see you around the place. --tronvillain (talk) 22:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
- I also agree with the statements by Doc James and Mathglot. You have been a valuable contributor during your time here and I'm sorry things turned out the way they did. I hope you come back to Misplaced Pages one day. I wish you all the best with life. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:03, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Block
You have been indefinitely blocked by the Arbitration Committee.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, then appeal by emailing the Arbitration Committee (direct address: arbcom-enwikimedia.org).
Administrators: This block may not be modified or lifted without the express prior written consent of the Arbitration Committee. Questions about this block should be directed to the Committee's mailing list.
You can see the relevant motion here. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am very sad to see this. I can only echo the words of DGG and say how much I appreciated your support on the various issues we were working on. Take care of yourself. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:55, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- I know we have disagreed over stuff when we've met, but I've always thought you were absolutely first and foremost here to improve the encyclopedia, and that comes across incredibly strongly in your work. Consequently, I am sad to see this case of affairs. Take care. Ritchie333 14:09, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- I can't believe this. WP will not be the same without you. Even though I am an admin and you are not, you were my go-to person whenever I suspected COI editing. I have been on a 3 month wikibreak myself and only a few days ago decided to come back. Seeing you blocked makes me doubt the wisdom of that decision. The spammers must be popping dozens of bottles of expensive champagne... Please don't scramble completely, leave your email. I sincerely hope to see you back one day. Take care. --Randykitty (talk) 14:17, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- I really wish you wouldn't take matters into your own hands liberally and aggressively despite of several people including myself have asked you not to do so in the past, and alienates good and bad COI editors indiscriminately altogether in the name of "helping" them to manage their COI. Perhaps you were too devoted to the project, which is evident by all the messages you received on this page. Come back after a year or so, when ArbCom is filled with more people that actually cares about the purpose and the integrity of the project, rather than self-appointed judges of misguided principles. Alex Shih (talk) 09:07, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- User:Alex Shih I hope this means we will see you running next year? We are likely going to need a bunch of new folks on arbcom if we wish things to change. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Doc James: Unlikely, since for the short amount of time I have been there I have seen too many members along the lines of paid editing is not big deal or everyone including spammers should have the right to enjoy "protection" in order to feel "safe" to "work" here without understanding the purpose of Misplaced Pages and that this is both a project and a encyclopedia. Maybe you should run since people would likely listen to you a bit more as you are more involved with the general movement itself. Alex Shih (talk) 10:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- I concur. I was even reprimanded and my edits revdel'ed when I pointed that a WP article on a clinician was created by a PR agency who also developed his website and promoted him on the radio/TV. Still, I was taken to ANI for OUT-ing, with all the bad consequences for me. BTW, the article is still there while I no longer come near any COI issues, even if obvious. So, a change of attitude is long overdue. — kashmīrī 13:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Doc James: Unlikely, since for the short amount of time I have been there I have seen too many members along the lines of paid editing is not big deal or everyone including spammers should have the right to enjoy "protection" in order to feel "safe" to "work" here without understanding the purpose of Misplaced Pages and that this is both a project and a encyclopedia. Maybe you should run since people would likely listen to you a bit more as you are more involved with the general movement itself. Alex Shih (talk) 10:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- I had posted a hidden Do Not Archive template on this section, since there are several well wishes here, namely from Kudpung, Ritchie333, Randykitty, and Alex Shih. Tryptofish has removed the DNAU template. Do you guys want the template replaced? Softlavender (talk) 23:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- I hadn't thought of that, sorry. I thought it was just perma-keeping the block notice. I have no objection to restoring the template. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:52, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- I put it back. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Uncle Fishy. Not only does the thread preserve the well wishes, it also alerts the unsuspecting that there's no point in posting new queries or complaints on this talkpage, and thus saves watchers a lot of time and explanations. It's perhaps not ideal in some people's minds to have the "Block" thread here, but Jytdog wanted to leave in a rather drastic fashion anyway, and there are other more genially titled threads that will be retained as well. Softlavender (talk) 02:16, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- As you probably know, I learned a lot from you, Jytdog (in relation to how to evaluate what is administrator noticeboard worthy or not at first, conflict of interest editing, determining medically reliable sources, some aspects of the pseudoscience related policy, and of what Misplaced Pages is not, as well as other general things by silently watching your busy talk page). I would like to thank you for all that you've done here. I am now aware of the circumstances that lead to your block and sudden retirement. If you eventually are back, this will be good news to me. —PaleoNeonate – 06:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog closed
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedy has been enacted:
- Jytdog (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from the English Misplaced Pages. He may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas (talk) 00:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 46#Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog closed
Carrying on
I shall be checking this talk page every day or two, and shall try to respond to problems raised. I can not however keep track of other edits to pages that jytdog may have been watching, but if help is needed on any, let me know either here on on my own talk page. I can only try to help deal with the problems that my role should have been to prevent. But a committee is a committee, and WP is a place where none of us can expect to always have things as we would like them. DGG ( talk ) 08:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Clearly, Jytdog leaves behind a hole that will be difficult to fill, and it would certainly be good if editors would each try to help wherever they can, even though no one will be able to cover everything. I guess two broad areas are matters related to WP:COI and some areas of biomedical research; he also had an editing interest in the history of religion. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:38, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- This is a useful guide he wrote for new WP users, slanted toward WP:MED, COI, and sourcing-template orientation. How best to preserve it? --Zefr (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Generally I use formaldehyde when I preserve things, but can you explain why this needs to be preserved? Natureium (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Preferring amber for long-term preservation ;>) I see it as a concise guide that might serve some new users as an alternate/supplement to WP:MEDHOW or WP:PSG, and if agreed as useful, should be kept accessible. --Zefr (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- But things don't just disappear around here, it should hang around without any special preservation. Natureium (talk) 01:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I guess it could be a question of moving it from user space to WP space. Or giving it a good shortcut and linking to it from pages in WP space. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- But things don't just disappear around here, it should hang around without any special preservation. Natureium (talk) 01:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Preferring amber for long-term preservation ;>) I see it as a concise guide that might serve some new users as an alternate/supplement to WP:MEDHOW or WP:PSG, and if agreed as useful, should be kept accessible. --Zefr (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Generally I use formaldehyde when I preserve things, but can you explain why this needs to be preserved? Natureium (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- This is a useful guide he wrote for new WP users, slanted toward WP:MED, COI, and sourcing-template orientation. How best to preserve it? --Zefr (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Jytdog/How qualifies as a useful essay and should be moved to where we put those. Jonathunder (talk) 21:16, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- Yes. And for starters, it will be reproduced in the next issue of The Signpost. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:21, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Jytdog should consider returning back
I just wanted to state that Misplaced Pages community is not the same without Jytdog and he is being missed. If real life permits, Jytdog should consider return back to editing.
- Please come back
Supportas I feel his absence has left a huge gap in areas Jytdog helped. No one is infallible, we learn and move on. I am sure you will read this, Hoping to see you back some day. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:18, 28 January 2019 (UTC) - What is this? You can't vote someone back to wikipedia when they've left by choice. If Jytdog wishes to return, he knows what he needs to do. Natureium (talk) 19:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
- This isn't a "Vote him back", just a show of support for his work and a 'non binding', wish from a fellow editor that he should "consider" returning back. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:30, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
- Hoping he'll come back. Ok, so this is not a !vote and "support" or "oppose" is not appropriate. But I for one sincerely hope that Jytdog will reconsider and come back. If this account has indeed be scrambled, then under a new account. Jytdog is sorely missed. --Randykitty (talk) 18:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
- Him returning would require us dealing with the arbcom motion. The details of the case that resulted in arbcom action are more or less public: Jytdog inappropriately contacted an editor by phone and for that he needs to be significantly warned. Do we the community feel it deserves an indefinite ban? That would require further discussion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:49, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- For what little it is worth, any return would involve a private discussion between him and ArbCom, but the rest of the community would not be involved in that. That's how the process works. I do hope to see him back eventually, but it's not my decision. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- If a super majority feels that arbcom has over reached, IMO we could technically over ride arbcom. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Doc James: I get where you are coming from, but please consider the effect your words have on the people who are victims of harassment. Here's a member of the board that oversees the organization charged with protecting Misplaced Pages editors from online and offline harassment seemingly downplaying or excusing an editor who harassed another editor in real life. The last idiot who cold-called me to harass me had a chat with a police sergeant, but not everyone is going to have a friendly police sergeant on hand to take their complaint seriously. They likely will have only the Foundation to turn to, and your responsibility is to all the editors served by the foundation, not just Jytdog. Gamaliel (talk) 23:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- People mess up. And we all agree that Jytdog messed up in this case. The question is more about what is an appropriate punishment for someone who has done this, admits it was wrong, and agrees to never do it again. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:15, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Actually, I don't think that the community can overrule ArbCom, nor should we. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Sure and I imagine that would be the position of many. I am not saying it is likely that a community discussion would result in a super majority for a lessor punishment or that their is much if any chance of a return of Jytdog even if the ban was lifted. So this is likely all just academic and a mute point. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ignoring whether or not the community can override ArbCom, Jytdog has not been punished for harassment. The indef block is to ensure that Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case, as we don't want a situation where editors can temporarily retire during a case and then return later to avoid facing it. No decision of punishment has been made by ArbCom in relation to the specific case. If the indef was removed, Jytdog would still need to go through ArbCom, who may or may not impose a ban and/or block. - Bilby (talk) 01:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- There was no stipulation in the block report that "Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case". Only that an ArbCom case was accepted, but since Jytdog had retired and presumably scrambled his password, he was blocked indefinitely and he can only be unlocked by going directly to ArbCom. Stating that "Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case" -- in other words, a full ArbCom case, is inferring facts not in evidence. Softlavender (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- I guess you can interpret it as you see fit. Fundamentally, a case was accepted and was agreed to be opened, but couldn't continue because Jytdog chose to retire rather than be involved in it. Therefore the account was indef blocked, the case was unable to be opened "at this time", and they can't continue to edit unless they get permission from ArbCom. As there is an accepted case, the "at this time" was specifically added to address the possibility of reopening the case if - as Opabinia regalis put it - Jytdog chooses to "stop and face the music". They could agree to resolve the issue by a motion, privately or otherwise, without opening the case, or they could open it, or whatever, but hopefully this just remains moot and we don't have to worry about it. - Bilby (talk) 04:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- There was no stipulation in the block report that "Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case". Only that an ArbCom case was accepted, but since Jytdog had retired and presumably scrambled his password, he was blocked indefinitely and he can only be unlocked by going directly to ArbCom. Stating that "Jytdog cannot resume editing without going through an ArbCom case" -- in other words, a full ArbCom case, is inferring facts not in evidence. Softlavender (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
...Jytdog messed up in this case.
And in the two and seven previous cases. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:39, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Actually, I don't think that the community can overrule ArbCom, nor should we. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- People mess up. And we all agree that Jytdog messed up in this case. The question is more about what is an appropriate punishment for someone who has done this, admits it was wrong, and agrees to never do it again. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:15, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- For what little it is worth, any return would involve a private discussion between him and ArbCom, but the rest of the community would not be involved in that. That's how the process works. I do hope to see him back eventually, but it's not my decision. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Him returning would require us dealing with the arbcom motion. The details of the case that resulted in arbcom action are more or less public: Jytdog inappropriately contacted an editor by phone and for that he needs to be significantly warned. Do we the community feel it deserves an indefinite ban? That would require further discussion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:49, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Jytdog may appeal his block by contacting ArbCom. That is not up for debate. What happens after that is as-yet unknown, neither set in stone nor explicitly laid out by ArbCom. There's no point in trying to parse unknowns, even the unknowns about whether Jytdog could regain access to this account or whether the password is forever blocked. What we can do is offer our support re: wishing for his return. Softlavender (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- I wish you would come back. You were too valuable and too dedicated to be lost over something petty like this, and the whole thing was a massive overreaction. I hope that you will reconsider your exile, and that Arbcom will, at this point, quickly resolve your case with minimal damage imposed. All the best, ~Swarm~ {talk} 07:06, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
- What Swarm says. ∯WBG
- If— . We miss you, come back. Widefox; talk 11:29, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: The best way IMVHO would be for Jytdog to ask for ArbCom's continuation of the case that was opened (and then closed after Jytdog's voluntary departure). It would make re-entry quite easier and in accordance to Misplaced Pages rules. -The Gnome (talk) 05:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- I for one hope to see a return given recent events even though many editors familiar with your good work are distracted by other ongoings, but we'll have to see how ArbCom reacts to the current case. Kingofaces43 (talk) 03:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hmm so he did and accepted the decision. Thanks for everyone's time and maybe there's a possibility in another 12 months... —PaleoNeonate – 09:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- It makes me angry when I see this, and note the number of tossers who edit this project. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 16:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Why doesn't someone just dig up his phone number, call him up, and ask him if he wants to come back? (Just kidding of course!) I miss Jytdog, too. Pretty much all of our WP:MEDRS watchdogs have necessarily had a lot of bark (and unnecessarily some bite). Hopefully the attrition rate will not worsen (I'm thinking also of a couple of T-bans). Just re-reading Jytdog's user-page essay on COI and related matters is a pleasure (in a WP policy-wonk way, anyhow). He really got it, and a version of that material should be edited down to an {{information page}} or other advice piece, both on how to avoid COI (especially in STEM, GLAM, etc.), and on how to detect it and help others avoid it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Jyt, dog! Missing your consideration and spirit today in particular. I just ran across your thoughtful contribution to a discussion elsewhere and wanted to consult you, and remembered this was just the commemorative-tea-cozy version of a talk page now. Hoping you're very well indeed. – SJ + 00:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Jytdog's good work noted in the media
I miss Jytdog, COI editing's one of my personal bugbears here & he's one of several editors who've helped me deal with the issues. He gets a nice mention in this HuffPo article on corporate spindoctors using questionable tactics to push POV and promo material & frustrate good editing https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wikipedia-paid-editing-pr-facebook-nbc-axios_n_5c63321be4b03de942967225. He did some stuff wrong, but it's a shame to see someone who did so much to keep this place reliable not be here any longer. JamesG5 (talk) 23:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- JamesG5 good share. Worthy appreciation of good work. Hope Jytdog also notices this.--DBigXrayᗙ 06:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for sharing. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:29, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- I put this article on Misplaced Pages:Press coverage 2019 and "This talk page has been mentioned by a media organization":ed it on six article talkpages. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:16, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- There's plenty of us miss Jytdog, and yet this sort of thing continues, increasingly unchecked. Plenty of them would have rejoiced at his block. Mramoeba (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2019 (UTC)