| Revision as of 08:26, 10 November 2008 editRussavia (talk | contribs)78,741 edits →Accusations of paedophilia against Putin: further← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:50, 11 November 2008 edit undoRussavia (talk | contribs)78,741 edits →Accusations of paedophilia against Putin: commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
| == Accusations of paedophilia against Putin == | == Accusations of paedophilia against Putin == | ||
| Hi Kirill, as one of the arbcoms members, I feel that I need to draw your attention to the re-insertion of serious ] on the ] article, in particular his unsubstantiated accusation that Putin is a paedophile. I posted a message at ] and got no response. I asked on IRC, and several editors, including admins, said this is an absolute BLP violation. Information was posted at ]. I was accused by Biophys on the Piotrus arbcom (which I am not a part of mind you) of "Protecting Vladimir Putin" in the removal of such information, and I responded to this (and other accusations) ]. As per ] of which you were a member, there are ] in place for serious BLP infractions, and I believe that having an unsubstantiated claim presented as fact in the article of one person to attack the subject of another article is not on. As I have posted a response to the arbcom in question, editors would have known of the other arbcom, now we have Biophys |
Hi Kirill, as one of the arbcoms members, I feel that I need to draw your attention to the re-insertion of serious ] on the ] article, in particular his unsubstantiated accusation that Putin is a paedophile. I posted a message at ] and got no response. I asked on IRC, and several editors, including admins, said this is an absolute BLP violation. Information was posted at ]. I was accused by Biophys on the Piotrus arbcom (which I am not a part of mind you) of "Protecting Vladimir Putin" in the removal of such information, and I responded to this (and other accusations) ]. As per ] of which you were a member, there are ] in place for serious BLP infractions, and I believe that having an unsubstantiated claim presented as fact in the article of one person to attack the subject of another article is not on. As I have posted a response to the arbcom in question, editors would have known of the other arbcom, now we have Biophys . This information needs to be presented in the arbcom but it seems to be such a mess, I have no idea where to place it, so if you could tell me that would be good. The issue of re-insertion of BLP information also needs to be dealt with, and I am quite reluctant to remove it or touch it for the accusations which could very well follow from it. --] <sup>] ]</sup> 08:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :I forgot also to ask. I am somewhat confused where to take this. Is the Piotrus arbcom the place for it? The administrators noticeboard? The administrators special enforcement noticeboard? It would be so much easier if such disputes didn't arise in the first place, but when they do, it can be so fricking confusing at to where to place information. --] <sup>] ]</sup> 08:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC) | :I forgot also to ask. I am somewhat confused where to take this. Is the Piotrus arbcom the place for it? The administrators noticeboard? The administrators special enforcement noticeboard? It would be so much easier if such disputes didn't arise in the first place, but when they do, it can be so fricking confusing at to where to place information. --] <sup>] ]</sup> 08:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ::I have placed this information at ], and removed it from the article again. No need to get back to me. --] <sup>] ]</sup> 06:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:50, 11 November 2008
|
|
| I am an administrator open to recall. To request this, please start a request for comment; if the consensus there is that my conduct has been unbecoming of an administrator, I will resign. | |
Couple of things
Strange that the transclusion problem in {{Infobox Firearm Cartridge}} should persist. When we last talked about this, we thought it would clear up when the caches sorted themselves out but it hasn't. Hmmm. --ROGER DAVIES
- I'm glad you're as baffled as I am :) --ROGER DAVIES 16:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I've been looking at perhaps including something in WP:MILMOS about ranks and titles as we seem to be getting queries. This has spun out of a discussion at here. I'd appreciate your counsel :) --ROGER DAVIES 04:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, Kirill. I was aiming to consolidate everything in one section (for instance, as you know, we already have the generic/proper noun thing covered elsewhere) but that is probably not the best way to go about it. I'll restrict the proposal to abbreviations and broaden it to include stuff like Coy, Regt, Flt, etc. I picked up Perseus' concerns too and was going to add something on that but that is probably, as you say, handled separately. --ROGER DAVIES 16:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Arb
I've endured half a year of solid barrages of personal attacks, incivility, vilification, demonization, outright lies, antisemitic ranting and other nonsense (all starting when Piotrus officially declared some sort of open season war on me by threatening me with a block for removing an egregious and and antisemitic BLP violating slur--an abuise of his admin authority which gave a green light to his minions to wage this war). All because I made a series of edits--all well sourced, fully within Wiki guidelines and still standing to this day--to some articles concerning Polish Jewry which had material that eas indisputably relective of an anti-Jewish bent, and which were an embarrassment to this encyclopedia. any number of admins have backed my efforts. If the end result is that I get banned, the impact on me is to remove one solid pain in my butt for the past six months. The impact on this encyclopedia though is a bit more embarrassing and sad though. I don't have the time nor interest in compiling "evidence" yet again. It's all out there. Please do as you feel appropriate. It's too silly and petty for me to spend much more of my time arguing about issues which every "outside" observier I've shown this case too finds to be patently absurd and offensive. Boodlesthecat 13:48, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Proposed decision - Abtract-Collectonian
In under 19 hours, this case will be two weeks old soon. All proposals pass, and one move to close has been made. If you could kindly hop on over to this page and vote on closing, that'd be great. Cheers :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 17:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Template help
Hi Kirill, I am trying to edit the {{WPSCOTCASTLE}} project banner to include C class articles, but when I put "class=C" in the template (as at Talk:Menstrie Castle), the category is still "Unassessed". If you have a spare moment, could you take a look and let me know what I'm doing wrong, or point me to some instructions? Many thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 12:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- OK, scrap that. Borgarde has updated the template to use Template:WPBannerMeta. It seems to be working fine. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Workshop - Piotrus 2
I've avoided pinging arbs on this case because this case is a sheer nightmare to go through. But it's been a few days since you've edited on there, and you've still got a few placeholders - will you need much more time to finish? If you can finish it soon, that would be good. If you're basically done, then if you can hop onto the PD page and make proposals there, that'd be great. Hopefully the case can be closed just before the beginning of December. :) Thank you, Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:44, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- You know, reminding or informing arbitrators about things they are overdue to vote on and so forth is great, but in this case, I bet Kirill already knows that he still has to finish the workshop. :) Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think so too. ;) However, there were a couple of specific points covered in my message, and Kirill's thoughtful reply (found on my talk page) has addressed/clarified them. Cheers again, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Accusations of paedophilia against Putin
Hi Kirill, as one of the arbcoms members, I feel that I need to draw your attention to the re-insertion of serious WP:BLP on the Alexander Litvinenko article, in particular his unsubstantiated accusation that Putin is a paedophile. I posted a message at Misplaced Pages:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Alexander_Litvinenko.2FVladimir_Putin and got no response. I asked on IRC, and several editors, including admins, said this is an absolute BLP violation. Information was posted at Talk:Alexander_Litvinenko#Paedophile_claims_removed_as_WP:BLP. I was accused by Biophys on the Piotrus arbcom (which I am not a part of mind you) of "Protecting Vladimir Putin" in the removal of such information, and I responded to this (and other accusations) here. As per this arbcom of which you were a member, there are special enforcements in place for serious BLP infractions, and I believe that having an unsubstantiated claim presented as fact in the article of one person to attack the subject of another article is not on. As I have posted a response to the arbcom in question, editors would have known of the other arbcom, now we have Biophys . This information needs to be presented in the arbcom but it seems to be such a mess, I have no idea where to place it, so if you could tell me that would be good. The issue of re-insertion of BLP information also needs to be dealt with, and I am quite reluctant to remove it or touch it for the accusations which could very well follow from it. --Russavia 08:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- I forgot also to ask. I am somewhat confused where to take this. Is the Piotrus arbcom the place for it? The administrators noticeboard? The administrators special enforcement noticeboard? It would be so much easier if such disputes didn't arise in the first place, but when they do, it can be so fricking confusing at to where to place information. --Russavia 08:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have placed this information at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus_2/Evidence#WP:BLP_concerns_and_Biophys, and removed it from the article again. No need to get back to me. --Russavia 06:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)