| Revision as of 09:37, 24 September 2006 editHkelkar (talk | contribs)7,279 edits →{{User|Dhammafriend}}← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:59, 13 August 2024 edit undoNewyorkbrad (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,481 edits update to remove reference to RfCs, as user-conduct RfCs were discontinued several years ago | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{historical}} | |||
| {{editabuselinks}}<br /> | |||
| <!-- Please remove/add HTML comments around {{adminbacklog}}. --> | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Personal attack intervention noticeboard/Header}} | |||
| :'''This process has been discontinued per ].''' | |||
| == New reports == | |||
| <!-- | |||
| Admins and editors: When the list is empty, please replace the placeholder * ''none currently listed'' | |||
| --> | |||
| * ''none currently listed'' | |||
| The personal attack intervention noticeboard (PAIN), created on ] ], was intended as a counterpart to ]. A person with complaints over ] could, after giving warnings, report a personal attacker on this page. | |||
| ==Open reports== | |||
| <!-- Place reports below this line only after there has been reply to the report --> | |||
| Unfortunately, the noticeboard generated a considerable amount of controversy. While ] is usually a clear cut case, and administrator intervention (i.e. blocking) is usually uncontroversial, determining whether a comment is a personal attack, incivil, or just simply blunt and frank, can be quite ]. That led to a lot of arguments, flame wars, tit-for-tat disputes and ] on this page. Even after several warnings as well as changes to the header designed to instruct users on how to use this page, this noticeboard continued to deteriorate. Due to this deterioration as well as some particularly poor exchanges in December 2006, the entire page was ], with the result that the noticeboard was closed on {{#formatdate:10 January 2007}}. | |||
| ==={{User|Axam}}=== | |||
| After disambiguating a term ] at ], ] undid the disambiguation and placed on my talk page stating that basically ''I'm not in charge''. After explaining to him the disambiguation policy and to assume good faith in , he started his personal attacks. | |||
| *"Don't mess with it again, and try to get a life nerd" , after which I told him that he shouldn't use personal attacks (no warning yet) | |||
| *Taking the note as a threat, he wrote "Are you threatening me nerd? You don’t have enough courage to keep up a conversation with rational arguments? I strongly suggest you get a life and keep away from Iran, Iranian culture and Iranian subjects." . At this point I sent a {{tl|npa2}} | |||
| *He then wrote "I strongly suggest you get a life" and "Remember you are nobody and nobody put you in charge." | |||
| -- ] 18:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Another personal attack on my page, after another user reverted him (an no edits on my part on the page or on his talk page) stating "The abuse of your self-declared provocation will not be tolerated." -- | |||
| :: A small update- The user was warned by Admin Sam Blanning to stop using anon IP addresses to bypass his block, wherein he proceeded to tell him "Feeling tough behind your screen boy?". I asked him to remain civil and that he should calm down, to which he responded by calling Sam (and apparently anyone else involved in the discussion) "geeks", "nerds", and that wikipedia was populated by "ignorant fools". Then he told me to "get a life". ] 06:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The closure of this noticeboard does not mean that personal attacks are tolerated; they should never be. It simply means that complaints over personal attacks are moved to different, and more appropriate venues such as the ], ] or, as a last resort, ]. | |||
| :::User has been blocked for 24 hours. --]<sup>]</sup> 09:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===Procedure=== | |||
| :::I have blocked this user for a week for making threats after his return. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ==={{User|Thankyoubaby}}=== | |||
| ] | |||
| {{user|Thankyoubaby}} has been repeatedly making personal attacks on his userpage; see , , , . The first round were directed toward three users, including myself, but for whatever reason he's now decided to focus on me. I've warned him twice already about this ; his response was to remove my messages from his talk page (note the edit summary in the first one). ] 17:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I warned him. --]<sup>]</sup> 09:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well, as he hasn't removed his latest personal attack directed towards me from his userpage (if you look at the diffs listed above, you'll know that this is clearly referring to me), I've blocked him for 24 hours. ] 12:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yeah, he seems to have a major issue with removing warnings. He removed mine and I saw he removed some of your contribs and even admitted that they were in good faith. Yeesh. --]<sup>]</sup> 06:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{user|75.3.23.157}}=== | |||
| Repeated personal attack on : calling me "ignorant" and "your hateful nature shines through in every message." ] already has NP3 warning on their Talk page. ] 17:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| after I reverted their vandalism | |||
| (vaguely insulting - calling me ignorant} http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Lordkazan&diff=prev&oldid=75725858 | |||
| {direct attack against my person} http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Lordkazan&diff=prev&oldid=75726763 | |||
| (edit) fixed ip! doh ] 17:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *:'''Comment''' Please also see my talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:CaveatLector#Chris_Kattan where this user has insinuated that I am a member of the Ku Klux Klan (also connecting LGBT activisits with the Klan (?????) and thereby indirectly insulting a good portion of the WP community). Also please note the user's talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:75.3.23.157 where several other users have also experssed to the user displeasure with personal attacks launched against them after reversion of his/her vandalism, even after the Wiki policy was quoted to him/her. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *: User is also harassing ] ] 23:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I should point out that Lordkazan was vandalizing wikipedia by reverting many of my edits which were valid. ] 01:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : Just because you assert an edit to be valid, doesn't make it so ] 13:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Actually, Lordkazan, you really shouldn't be talking, you think that something is true and sourced is not a valid edit? You have equally done as much vandalism as me. You also need to be warned that you should not revert all edits by one person, even if they are valid, just because you are upset that that user is more knowledgable than you in one area. ] 16:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I didn't connect gay activist with the klan. I connect people such as CaveatLector that although they are gay, they would be liked by the klan because of negative views towards African-Americans, Jews, Catholics, Hispanics, and immigrants. I didn't say that CaveatLector was a member of the klan, just that they'd like him. I could be wrong and CaveatLector could hold similiar views to the KKK because perhaps his father was a member and they probably wouldn't like him then for straying from the flock. ] 01:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : ] claimed in Edit summaries and on my Talk page that I must be anti-Catholic because I was reverting the vandalism of ] page. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 05:14, September 15, 2006 (UTC{{{3|}}})</small> | |||
| === Messhermit === | |||
| {{User|Messhermit}} has been baned from editing the Wiki entry on ]. Nevertheless, {{User|Messhermit}} continues his baseless personal attacks on my talk page, as well as on the talk page of ] who was his advocate in the editing dispute leading to the editing ban of {{User|Messhermit}}-- | |||
| ], 20 September | |||
| :He's been warned. --]<sup>]</sup> 09:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{User|Éponyme}}=== | |||
| This users has blantantly tried to attack me. He used prohanity and made comments against me based on my national origin, describing me as "goddamned asshole from Europe trying to apply imperialist arrogance." After issuing the <nowiki>{{npa2}}</nowiki>, he promptly deleted it, adn issued the same warning to me, despite myself staying civil. He also promtly removed the warning. Here are the difs: , , , after being issued <nowiki>{{npa3}}</nowiki> he made his post a bit nastier: , , . He also continues to abstain from a civil discussion: , , | |||
| Please take action if you could, thank you. Best Regards, <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 00:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I suppose that the "incorrigible" nature of this editor in applying separate standards for style (because Americans are ''so different''), as well as general ignorance of my ethnic roots, making disparaging comments about the nature of it and saying he knows more than I, a native American unlike he. His inflammatory comments were the first such in my life that I ever took a stand against with respect to my American ethnicity and United States citizenship. I also voted for George W. Bush and I'm sure that will weigh against me here. Then again, Jimbo is a Randian and would understand where I'm coming from in contrast to hyphenated Americans--as he is an ethnic American like me. You know, don't bother defending America's colonial ethnics from pre-1776 or at least before the first census in 1790. Just support all these immigrants and downgrade the folks who gave them a country to move to. Goddamn, I am really hurt. Stop it--I am the victim here. ] 01:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| There is currently an RfC on this article, which I filed; All 4 Users have agreed with me that the article's title is misleading, yet he keeps pushing that the title be kept in an uncivil manner. This is how he (the user above) responded to 3rd party comments from the RfC I filed: , After a fifth user spoke out in favor of changing the title, this is how the user responded: Best Regards, <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 02:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :The nature of those responses to the situation, truly delineates their apathy to my position. I stand in defense of what unsympathetic people don't care if they tarnish or not. They want to call the American people illegitimate. This type of discussion would not be tolerated in the 1950s. All the opposing positions to my one position would have been rightfully ostracized for making callous, ignorant and anti-American statements. ] 02:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I just warned Éponyme with <nowiki>{{npa4}}</nowiki> after Éponyme insinuated that I was anti-American at ]. Éponyme's response was to place the same template, without any factual basis, at my talk page. Éponyme has been asked by multiple users at ] to calm down and discuss things civilly. Éponyme has not done so. · <font color="#013220">]</font>'' <font color="#465945" size="1">]</font>'' · 03:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :How can you disassociate yourself from my situation, so apathetically and continue to bash at me like I'm some lab rat and the fate of my people is an intellectual phenomena? You should be blocked for such intolerant assertations. You bring it upon yourself for joining the lynchmob on a true blue American, who only wants to ensure the story of his people gets fair treatment and no more! ] 03:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I would also note that Éponyme has been warned multiple times at his or her talk page, but Éponyme has removed each npa notice placed there. · <font color="#013220">]</font>'' <font color="#465945" size="1">]</font>'' · 03:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :OOH YEAH, take that! When you jump on the bandwagon and run into the same walls, maybe it is time to try less hypocritical and apathetic strategies. ] 03:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I have blocked ] for twenty-four hours. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ====] has returned==== | |||
| This user was blocked two days ago and is still making false, offending, accusations towards me. (I do know if I should start a new reoprt or continue on the "open" report below) Here the difs: , , . After warning him for being uncivil he simply returned those warning on my talk page: , , If you could please look at this case again I would appreciate it. Thank you, <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 01:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::This guy has been making many severe insults, such as false analogies and relativism about ethnic identity. I believe his arguments to be of the new and revisionist social science, that diminishes ethnicity and focuses more on the human experience apart from "]s". This inaccuracy with his argumentations result in the debasement of my people and my country, by insinuating that my country is a whorehouse of vagabonds. To top it off, it is further enraging that he has tried to abolish the non-notional, but extant social sector of America descended from those responsible for giving him a country to emigrate to. An American's hero would be ] or ], or ], or ], or ], or ]; a German-American's hero would be ] or at least ], or ], or ]. This man Brendel is an immigrant trying to basically "educate the natives" about their people and land, which means he is talking down to me and essentially all whitebread Americans. I would welcome his American hyphen if he learnt to tolerate our customs and sense of being, rather than be such a dictator on terms that are only expounded by new ]. I need not tell those other Americans that his imperialist attitude to my "colonial" self is unappreciated and actively hostile. There is no more intolerance I recieve than meddlesome ignorance from a foreigner like this, through my day after day existence. I recieve German tourists every week at my place of employment. Thank God they do not interfere with judgements about the status of Americans vis a vis hyphenated Americans. If they did, I would refuse service and do without the patronage. That should be enough to explain how Brendel is way out of line and rude above all, naivete being no excuse--but arrogance a surely more accurate depiction of his attempts to eradicate the American people from a place here on Misplaced Pages. He may say he loves America, but he does not make for a welcome stay and express congeniality to his hosts. His hosts are not hyphenated Americans, but Americans themselves. I cannot account for those Americans who hate their identity and ANACHRONISTICALLY choose to trace their heritage to Europe, but that is probably a further reason why Americans are increasingly a minority in their own homeland--according to the U.S. Census Bureau at least. Hyphenation of George Washington to English American is an anachronism. Please don't accept anachronisms as entirely accurate. ] would be so incensed with this rabble rouser as to demand a duel and whoop this man's ass for such impudence! He knows not! His attitude is more or less the same as Britons calling Americans "colonials". I would tell anybody like that to fuck off. The difference between Brendel and myself, is that I am unashamed to be called a "cowboy", but he would be insulted to be compared to true Americans. Germany is not a country which supplied America with '''cowboys''' (Germany supplied us with merchants, miners and mercenaries--during the Civil War especially)--we had them here when 1776 rolled around. Go ahead and spit on this cowboy. ] 08:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :From above: "] would be so incensed with this rabble rouser as to demand a duel and whoop this man's ass for such impudence! He knows not! His attitude is more or less the same as Britons calling Americans "colonials". I would tell anybody like that to fuck off."- I find this to be quite uncivil. Regards, <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 20:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Don't incite a war of words then--you're very offensive and insensitive to be so prejudiced. ] 21:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Another offensive comment: <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 03:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| You're just upset that I don't and won't follow the ]. Try to shove it down your own people's throat; I will not take it. Your words and claims are false in almost every respect. You twist and distort to serve a political agenda that should have no place here. ] 06:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{user|Mystar}}=== | |||
| <s>{{user|Mystar}} has been engaging in a pattern of personal attacks in his contributions and edit summaries. Notable recent examples include , which was an echoing of comments , , and . When this problem first emerged a few weeks ago, Mystar was , and for a while he moderated his tone. On his resumption of attacks, I reminding him of ] and pointing out specific examples. He replied by denying that he had made attacks and accusing me of using sock puppets and acting in bad faith. I don't dispute that on occasion other editors may have occasionally been over the line in their comments, but I don't believe anyone's contributions have been as persistently virulent and unproductive as Mystar's, and as long as he doesn't believe he has made attacks, I believe he will continue to behave in this manner. Most immediately I'm looking for an admin or other neutral user to weigh in on whether his conduct has been acceptable. ] 21:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)</s> I am now considering other forms of dispute resolution. ] 14:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Well as you are so fond of stating Moody, offer up all the facts. You seem to keep forgetting that your buddies have been doing the instigating and staging random attacks. Not to mention have attacked me and you have done nothing but warn me. I find it interesting that your group is the only ones creating the unrest. I'm simply trying to keep them from totally demolishing some good pages. If need be I too can cite attacks and abuse. The pot calling the kettle black simply gets everyone covered in soot. Most immediately I’m looking for fairness and integrity...in short honesty! Again I have made no threats against anyone. I did tell the sock puppet WLU who suddenly showed up to edit war to divulge his/her true identity. To be honorable rather than hide. But he/she would much rather play games in his/her sudden attack against the Goodkind pages. As I've said. I have compiled several pages of material of these people planning and encouraging people to vandalize the Goodkind pages on their ASOIAF Message board. They did and I called them out. | |||
| I again call them out to edit in good faith. Which all we see is a couple of them edit warring. Deleting and tagging what they see as errors. Look IF you see a problem... stop and fix it! Don't tag it and run... Act in Good Faith! All we see is attacks against the Goodkind pages. If you don't like the way the material reads then edit it. Fix it! Some people only wish to create problems...as we see with Neofreak and WLU. | |||
| Stop being part of the problem and help the solution. Also if you are going to tattletale then do so for all parties involved. Show all the abuse... not just the person to who is trying to combat the vandalism. Trying for a high EDIT count is not reason to just go hopping about tossing tags on everything. | |||
| ] 04:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :<s>Please feel free to post specific ] that you think constitute personal attacks on you. Indeed, I'll provide one myself. by {{user|WLU}} is a rather blatant sarcastic insult, particularly the last sentence. As I've said repeatedly, he shouldn't do that; I'm in the process of writing a note for him to that effect. The reason I did not include him in this request is that he has not been given the required chain of warnings that you have, and has not in my opinion engaged in sufficiently frequent or virulent attacks that this sort of intervention is warranted. I may be wrong about this; reviewers and admins reading this page will have to judge that. But I am not obligated to identify conduct I do not consider egregious enough to warrant intervention simply because you consider it so. You remain free to offer your own commentary, and I encourage you to do so. As a general guide for reviewers and admins, I'll say that articles relevant to the large dispute to which Mystar alludes are ], ], ], and some pages related to topics in those authors' works. ] 05:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)</s> See above. ] 14:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::*'''Comment''': I have not added any {{tl|npa2}} or {{tl|npa3}} templates to ] talk page, or taken any other action, as ] has scratched his request, but I'm moving the entire situation to Open Reports for an admin to keep an eye on or handle further as he/she feels may be appropriate. --] 21:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| === {{user|SqueakBox}} and {{user|Hagiographer}} === | |||
| {{user|SqueakBox}} was blocked for a week per his personal attack parole (resulting from arbitration) for writing on his user page that one of his achievements was | |||
| : ''restoring ] from the ] of another user who claims to write about saints but who is determined to slur him. '' | |||
| This is a veiled reference to {{user|Hagiographer}}, who acts exactly like {{user|Zapatancas}}, the other party in arbitration. Squeakbox modified the reference so it now says, | |||
| :''restoring José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero from the POV of another user who claims to write about saints. '' | |||
| Hgiographer claims this is still a personal attack and changed the user page on his own several times before it was protected. I would like some idea on whether the revised statement is acceptable or whether it sill constitutes a personal attack. No action is required at this time as Squeakbox is currently blocked for other reasons. ] 12:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :*'''Comment''': In my opinion, the revised statement remains a personal attack. If nothing else, it implies that {{user|Hagiographer}} can't write, which is an insult. But also (and possibly more importantly given that this is an Arbcom matter), it's evidence that {{user|SqueakBox}} has little interest in adhering to the ''spirit'' of the Arbcom ruling, even if he is willing, under extreme admin pressure, to adhere to the ''letter'' of the ruling. If this was a run-of-the-mill matter, I'd slap an {{tl|npa3}} tag on Squeakbox's user talk page in a heartbeat. But given that it's all in arbitration, I'll just leave this here for an admin to make the final decision. --] 22:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{User|128.252.128.243}}=== | |||
| IP engaged in numerous acts of extreme vandalism, for which I blocked for 48 hours. Then proceeded to lay a personal attack on me . Thought perhaps a longer block might be appropriate, but also thought I should leave it up to other admins, since now I'm "involved". Thanks. --03:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Block extended, that's a highly inappropriate edit by the IP user. ] 03:24, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks. --] (]) 03:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The page ]contains lot of personal attacks. Pradeep Somasundaran is a great ] in ]. Somebody is trying to belittle him by using the page ] ] 17:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Administraters plese remove personal attacks from the above said page. | |||
| ==={{User|Storm Rider}}=== | |||
| I am requesting an outside opinion as to whether (note edit summary as well) and constitute personal attacks. If so, would someone mind placing the warning (if deemed appropriate)? (it seems too biased coming from me as the target), and if not, would someone please boot me in the behind and ask me to lighten up? Thanks ] 17:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :"Stop feeding the troll" and "Laughable" are not personal attacks, unless said repeatedly and with intent of disruption. See ] ] <small>] • ]</small> 03:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Also, this became a heated topic for a few days - I think short tempers between SR and R and others were understandable. Both should probably have ] (or a nice cup of hot chocolate). The article is doing better thanks to both of their persistence. -] 23:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{User|Dhammafriend}}=== | |||
| He has repeatedly characterized my ethnic/religious affiliations in a pejorative manner. First, he wrongly accused me of being an upper-caste Hindu and evoked several ] and ] canards against me . I warned him . Then, he made some borderline ] remarks concerning my Jewishness (see bottom). I do not believe that my ethnic/religious affiliation is relevant to my edits on wikipedia, so I believe that these are personal attacks and I request that they be handled accordingly.] 16:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::'''Update''': He has made another ethnic characterization against admins . In particular note the following statement: | |||
| {{cquote|Wiki Administrators except ] and ] ] please take note of this.}}.This user continues to make these types of characterizations which are attacks on people and are detrimental to discussion on wikipedia.] 16:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I think at least some of this is a misunderstanding. I left a mild caution to be more careful. I hope that will be enough. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't think so. The racist and hateful comments keep pouring in and in and in . He has continued to pour in the ], ] remarks.] <font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 23:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :This guy has attacked me, thegreyanomaly multiple times. | |||
| :::User Thegreyanomaly the article "Indian Buddhist Movement" is about Religious movement which is growing in India slowly since last 50 years. If you are anti-Buddhist we certainly don't have any objection about your religion. You can be a Brahmin-Hindu if you are a priest by profession in any temple otherwise you are a Shudra-Hindu because all non-priest i.e. non-Brahmins are SHUDRA in Hindu Religion. In Kali Yuga Hindus have only two Varna as per the religious philosophy of Hindus. If you are from India then you might be knowing that Buddhism in India was totally killed. Some blame Brahmins Or some blame Muslims for that, it is a vast topic of study. I don't want to blame anybody. Hindu Castiesm, Hindu Untouchability and Caste based Graded Inequality became very strong after fall of Buddhism in Indian sub-continent and before British came to India. Education to all non-Brahmins was banned and the rigid Hindu Religious laws made by Brahmins like Manusmriti, VishnuSmriti and other DharmaShastras became the laws to govern the non-Muslim society. | |||
| :::British gave education for all and broke the anti-Human Hindu Laws. After Independence Dr. Ambedkar revived Buddhism in India. He also established "Buddhist Society of India" certainly NOT Navayana Society! So there is no meaning branding the movement as Navayana. Because the founder of India's Buddhist Revival Movement which is certainly against Hindu Casteism and injustice that Hindus are doing since hundreds of years called his movement as Buddhist Movement. Also Dr. Ambedkar said that 'He will convert whole India back to Buddhism' but he was killed just within 6 weeks after his conversion to Buddhism. Some people blamed Brahmins for his death. It is not sure how he died. I dont want to blame anybody. So you can discuss current Buddhist Developments in the article "Indian Buddhist Movement". About Hindu Caste and related things you better write to Hindu Articles Or Caste Related to Articles. If Navayana is a anto-caste publication then you should put that link in Caste Related article. | |||
| :::In India legal system we have Hindus, Muslims, Christens and BUDDHIST as different religion. Expecially our 2001 cencus gives more details about different religions population. We dont have any 'Navayana Buddhist' in whole India neither it is recognized legally anywhere. Officially we have around 1% Buddhists in India. This population unofficially can be 4% also because thousands of people are converting to Buddhism. But lets take official figures. | |||
| :::Caste is a problem of Hindus certainly not the problem of Buddhists. Be a contributor to wikipedia but don't just try to vandalise different articles. Dhammafriend 10:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :This one was both on my ] and on ] | |||
| : I responded to him | |||
| :::Umm... I'm an EX-Brahmin who converted to Theravada Buddhism... | |||
| :::I edited Navayāna into the article because in <u>Buddhism in India : Challenging Brahmanism and Caste</u> by Gail Omvedt (This book is incredibly anti-Caste and is pro-Buddhist) I have read Neo-Buddhism being referred to as Navayana, which is is obviously a non-IAST transliteration of navayāna. | |||
| :::"Ambedkar's Buddhism seemingly differs from that of those who accepted by faith, who 'go for refuge' and accept the canon. This This much is clear from its basis: it does not accept in totality the scriptures of the Theravada, the the Mahayana, or the Vajrayana. The question that is then clearly put forth: is a fourth <i>yana</i>, a Navayana, a kind of modernistic Enlightenment version of the Dhamma really possible within the framework of Buddhism?" (8) | |||
| :::The book blatantly says that Ambedkar DESIGNED what has become known as navayāna. | |||
| :::He did not found the Navayana publishing house. I edited in that there is a Navayana publishing house into the article so people would not confuse, navayāna, yāna, and Navayana, the publishing house. | |||
| :::I'm going to put the navayāna comment back into ]. Please do not edit it out again. Navayāna is an accepted name of neo-Buddhism. | |||
| :::Peace, ] | |||
| :That one was on the ] and there is more to his response on that page. Please ban him. He is beyond being disciplined | |||
| :::Buddhist do not have caste neither they believe any former caste like Brahmin,Bhangi ,Scheduled Caste, OBC caste etc. So don't claim false things. I have Buddhist friends in America who can certainly verify your identity. So if want to discuss you can also meet our Buddhist friends in America so don't try to fool wikipedia community. Who gave you ordination as Buddhist? Do you know the process to become a Buddhist? Dhammafriend 10:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :] 23:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC), ] 23:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC), ] 23:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Unless I am mistaken, he has not posted anything since I left my caution on his talk page. Let's see if that helps. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :While the complaint is still pending, he just made more ethnic attacks against me. He called me "anti-Buddhist" and characterized my alleged "Caste" by referring to me as a "Brahmin"/"Shudra" (amusingly, I'm not even a Hindu).I am adding diffs to that effect in the PAIN report but I humbly request you to please intervene. His inflammatory comments in the talk page of ] are making it very difficult for us legitimate editors to create a good article. The diffs of his most recent attacks are below: | |||
| http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk%3AIndian_Buddhist_Movement&diff=77509724&oldid=77417417 | |||
| In particular, the comments from the diff above: | |||
| {] can come and understand the status.}} | |||
| {{cquote|] hate is too much in ] ] ] minds}} | |||
| Referring to both me and ] | |||
| and | |||
| {{cquote|Mr.] you are not the first anti-Buddhit person on this planet.}} | |||
| {] so debate is a civilised manner}}. | |||
| Despite the fact that I have made no attacks against anyone. | |||
| ] 09:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{User|John_Spikowski}}=== | |||
| John Spikowski constantly personally attacks me and the PanoTools user group | |||
| f.e.: | |||
| . He was recently banded for a 3RR. | |||
| All this happend after the . | |||
| ] listed him yesterday but thought this issue is solved. You will easily find the older attacks like | |||
| and the comment in | |||
| Thx for your help. --] 01:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I left him an {{tl|npa3}}.--] 04:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:59, 13 August 2024
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
- This process has been discontinued per this discussion.
The personal attack intervention noticeboard (PAIN), created on 7 October 2005, was intended as a counterpart to the request for intervention against vandalism page. A person with complaints over personal attacks could, after giving warnings, report a personal attacker on this page.
Unfortunately, the noticeboard generated a considerable amount of controversy. While vandalism is usually a clear cut case, and administrator intervention (i.e. blocking) is usually uncontroversial, determining whether a comment is a personal attack, incivil, or just simply blunt and frank, can be quite subjective. That led to a lot of arguments, flame wars, tit-for-tat disputes and wikilawyering on this page. Even after several warnings as well as changes to the header designed to instruct users on how to use this page, this noticeboard continued to deteriorate. Due to this deterioration as well as some particularly poor exchanges in December 2006, the entire page was nominated for deletion, with the result that the noticeboard was closed on 10 January 2007.
The closure of this noticeboard does not mean that personal attacks are tolerated; they should never be. It simply means that complaints over personal attacks are moved to different, and more appropriate venues such as the administrators' noticeboard, dispute resolution or, as a last resort, arbitration.
Procedure
Misplaced Pages:Personal attack intervention noticeboard/Header
Categories: