Misplaced Pages

User talk:NYScholar: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:45, 10 February 2008 view sourceNYScholar (talk | contribs)41,511 edits Disrupting my talk page: tc; summary← Previous edit Revision as of 01:16, 10 February 2008 view source Sarah (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions18,075 edits restore this in progress conversation with 3 administratorsNext edit →
Line 50: Line 50:


{{-}} {{-}}
== Please explain ==
*********************************************************************************************
Where are the personal attacks? It's a completely false accusation and should be retracted immediately. —] 11:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
'''The above discussion is over.''' It is in process of being archived. See archive 18. --] (]) 00:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


==Disrupting my talk page== ==Warning re: disruption==
NYScholar, your behaviour at this user talk page has become disruptive. It is not really ''your'' talk page; it is everyone's, for use in talking to you. Your constant removal of legitimate messages, along with your request that people not post here, amount to a refusal to communicate with your peers. Unfortunately, there are plenty of reasons why people need to, and have every right to, talk to you, so long as you intend to remain a part of this community. For example, I notice that you accused Moondyne of a personal attack, and when he posted here to ask you to substantiate or withdraw that accusation, you simply removed the message unreplied.
I have asked people to stop posting about these matters on my talk page; the posts are disrupting more than my talk page; they are disrupting my work schedule and my life. I am very tired and I want to rest. I recovered from a recent month-long illness early in January, and I have no desire to fall ill again because of what ''I'' am regarding as disruptive activity by others (not I) on my (yes, my) Misplaced Pages talk page. '''Please stop disrupting my talk page, my work schedule, and my life.''' Please demonstrate some compassion. Thank you. --] (]) 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC) ] (]) 22:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)]


I'm now giving you a formal warning that your management of this talk page is disruptive, because it is likely to cause anger and frustration amongst your collaborators. If it continues, I may act to prevent this disruption by blocking you from editing, for a time.
For those who need such guidance, before posting anything on my current talk page, please see: ] and ] (sec. on User talk pages), particularly ], and the other links at top of page, as well as my "N.B." sec. Thank you. (Updated. This will all be archived shortly.) ---] (]) 23:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


I have restored Moondyne's message above. It requires a considered response.
NYScholar, this page is provided for other users to communicate with you. The way you are currently conducting, telling good faith editors and administrators to buzz off and stop disturbing you is not acceptable. I think if you have 'real life' work you need to do and you find other editors on Misplaced Pages an annoying distraction, you really ought to stop logging onto the site until you've finished your work and have time to respond to people's questions and concerns. Frankly, you shouldn't be editing Misplaced Pages if you're not prepared to respond to your fellow editors. Also, please consider using the 'preview' button and ensuring your post is complete and correct before posting it instead of making half-a-dozen minor edits to every post you make, catching people in multiple edit conflicts. ] 23:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


Feel free to archive ''this'' message once you've read it. ] 12:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
], and in editing summaries of ] and who has already made the same comment about wanting me to use "show preview" multiple times; I've read the comments, responded to them before, and already said that I already use "show preview" for all my edits.]


] (]) 00:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)] : This "user talk page" is "my" "user talk page" in the sense that I am the "user" identified on it. In that sense, it is "my user talk page"; in Misplaced Pages one refers to "Hesperian's talk page", "NYScholar's talk page" and so on. One knows what I mean when I say "my talk page": it is pointing to ''which'' talk page one is referring to. Misplaced Pages provides "leaway" for user talk pages: it says so right in descriptions of "user space." --] (]) 21:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


When one edits in sections, the notes citations texts do not show up; "show preview" does not show them; many of my edits have been corrections to notes citations, and they have been done in stages when I have been in editing sections; I have had to return to the page in full article mode in show preview to see the results of the edits. That's just a Misplaced Pages glitch. Many people encounter that problem. It has nothing to do with "show preview" if one is in sections; one has to be in full article editing mode to see notes citations. Given the vast number of changes needed to the citation templates, editing that article has resulted in having to return from section to full many times. One does not always know how things will post in citations in "show preview" in sections. That leads to having to return multiple times. I have already said in the talk pages of articles that I do not like using citation templates; I have deferred to their use in that article, but it is hard to work with them (as many will attest); there are puncutation problems that often need correction: the problem with the citation templates as some people were creating them is already discussed fully in ]. Please see that discussion. --] (]) 00:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC) :I have repeatedly asked this person not to keep posting these misleading messages on my talk page. The person will not stop. I responded cordially to a request for a "favour" (see archive 18), thanked the person on that person's own talk page and received nothing but grief since then. I have had it with this person. There is no further response that I can make. I will archive this discussion tomorrow. After spending an enormous amount of my time correcting errors and trying to improve an article, I am tired, and I do not want to deal with this other person. I suggest that you read the comments on the person's own talk page and at ] and get a fuller and fairer picture of what is going on here. I will archive all of this tomorrow. But I will spend no more of my time responding to that other user, who does not recognize cordiality or courteous behavior and, in my view, is violating ]. (I spent over a half hour responding to the requested "favour" and changed both my user page and my talk page presentation in doing so. Those changes are the only ones that I want to take my time to make (and they were considerable changes). I am turning back to my other non-Misplaced Pages work for the rest of the weekend (at least). Good day! --] (]) 12:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


:As far as what user talk pages are for, I've linked in two places above already to ]; I've read them, and I know what they are. Talk pages are not for harrassing other users, and that is what that other user has been using my talk page for lately: see Archive 18, where at first I excepted that user from such behavior; right after I did that, the user started harrassing me on my current talk page. If the user keeps doing it, I will keep deleting the comments and/or archiving them, or moving them to the user's own talk page. I've given fair warning in "N.B." above (which has been there for months in one form or another.) Good day! I'm logging out. --] (]) 12:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

::I don't post warnings lightly; I had already reviewed the situation thoroughly. It is entirely reasonable that you be required to substantiate or withdraw your accusation, even if it does take a few minutes for you to do so. My position remains that Moondyne's message requires a considered response. ] 12:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

:''What'' "accusation"? The person is upsetting me; I'm entitled to say that and to ask the person to stop doing it. I consider continually posting on a talk page when one has been asked not to do so "harrassment." I've made myself very clear. I also explained that I had other work to do that I would rather be doing, so I will turn to it. Against my own better judgment relating to my own time constraints, I spent the entire night working on correcting errors and trying to improve the article ]; I have run out of time or energy or desire to (1) work on it anymore and (2) to deal with others who mostly must engage in talk page discussion and don't spend as much time actually working to improve the articles. There is a difference. I'll look at the link later. This is my own response to what the person is generally asking me: I made my complaint clear on the person's own talk page: the complaint is: I've asked you not to keep upsetting me on my talk page, and yet you keep doing it. That should be clear enough. The person's editing summaries about my work breach ] and the person cited an early version of a passage that I later revised as if it had not been revised, describing it in negative terms, which breaches other WP. I've already also made that clear. What the person is doing is uncivil and a form of taunting. User space is user space, and user talk pages give users some leaway in how they present them. I have explained how I prefer to use mine, and that I do not want to discuss how to improve articles on my talk page. Those discussions are for the talk pages of articles. --] (]) 12:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You have stated on ]: "I would appreciate it if the above user (Moondyne) (and some others) would stop these ridiculous personal attacks". That is clearly and unambiguously an accusation against Moondyne. My position remains the same: it is disruptive for you to make such an accusation, then ignore a request to either prove it or withdraw it. ] 12:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

:I wrote an explanation just now and lost it. The beginning of the focus on me instead of on the edit (violating ]: focus on the content not the contributor) began with the labeling of a subsequently-revised sentence as a "rant" and "fluff" etc. and moved toward a further breach of ] with the user's focusing back on the same earlier version of the sentence and even linking to it (to have the descriptions show up again) rather than to focus on the fact that the sentence had already been revised (by me) and quoted on ] for further discussion. Then the user came to my talk page asked me to do him/her a "favour," involving changing the layout of my talk page, which I spent a half hour or so doing, after which I ''thanked'' the user on his/her own talk page. Without any acknowledgment that I had even complied with the requested "favour," the user then started posting still more stuff on my talk page even though I had courteously asked the user ''not'' to do so and s/he continued to do so above, despite my continuing requests on his/her talk page not to do so. Completely disregarding another user's request for desisting from this is in my view an implicit personal attack, a clear sign of total disrespect for another's clearly-expressed wishes. I also had to delete some harrassment from another user. Focusing on me, the contributor, instead of on the actual nature of the edits themselves (without negatively labeling them as a "rant" or "fluff" when they are actually good-faith edits) is, in my view, a violation of ], ], and ] (the admonition to focus on the content not on the contributor). Going to someone's talk page to ask a "favour" and then not acknowledging compliance with such a requested favour and going back to complain further, despite being asked several times not to do so, is, in my view, a veiled personal attack, harrassment, and a violation of ]. --21:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
::See the clearcut knowledge that the user had that the "diffs." link s/he gave to rehash an already-revised matter was to an obsolete version of a sentence: ] and .. To me there seems to be a personal animus involved in that maneuver, and I took it as a personal attack on me, which was totally unnecessary, gratuitous, and not in any way related to the then-current editing of the article in a manner to improve it, as the sentence had already been revised (improved), whether or not the user liked the more recent version any better than the earlier version; the rehashing violated ] (as well).] --] (]) 21:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC) ] (]) 21:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)]

I must say that I've been very concerned about NYScholar's use of this page for a couple of months now and have kept his/her page on my watchlist as a result. I had to contact NYScholar because the foundation was contacted by the brother of a man NYScholar claimed had died but in reality was still alive. The brother hadn't had recent contact and was distressed to learn of his brother's "death" via a google search of his name. He wished to talk to NYScholar to find out the details of his brother's "death". Only NYScholar declined email contact saying s/he prefers all contact to be on site (fair enough, I suppose). This forced the brother to register for an account specifically to to talk to NYScholar but a couple of hours after responding, NYScholar archived his/her talk page. It seemed rather rude to me that NYScholar would claim a man had died, causing his family great distress only to immediately archive the thead. Do you think someone who has never used Misplaced Pages before and who came here to address such a matter would have seen NYScholar's reply in the couple of hours it was posted? Would he have known where to find the archived reply or would he have thought his message had simply been deleted without response and then given up in disgust? Makes you wonder what kind of message people unfamiliar with Misplaced Pages must get. I had to apologise to the poor man several times. ] 13:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an unnecessary discussion. It was already discussed. I apologized for the error (more than once), which was an error that I found in one of the sources that I had consulted. I have actually spoken the the MLA about this matter (I am a lifetime member of that organization). The person in question was a former editor of the MLA Bibliography whose departure from the MLA is not explained on its site. See the archived talk page discussions about this matter, with all the relevant links: '''I corrected the problem in the article citations and text and any others relating to it, including talk pages and apologized as soon as I learned of it.''' (Seldom does one encounter a family member who has been in such infrequent contact with a relative that he or she does not know whether or not the person is alive or dead. I guessed at the problem without being in contact via e-mail, and I guessed correctly and made the changes to the article and talk page without even being asked to do so.)
:]: I do not use personal e-mail in Misplaced Pages for good reason. I cannot and have no wish to deal with the types of incivility and harrassment that I encounter on talk pages of Misplaced Pages in my professional (personal) e-mail account from people who apparently have nothing better to do than to vandalize Misplaced Pages or to attack others in talk pages. "Preferences" in Misplaced Pages exist for the use and protection of Misplaced Pages users who select them from clearly designed options. I have with good reason and entirely appropriately selected the option of ''not'' using e-mail with Misplaced Pages and Wikipedians. No one should be pressuring me to do so. ''No one'' should be suggesting that my choice of not using e-mail is in any way in conflict with ]. It is not. I will be archiving the entire discussion from this point above shortly. One can find it in my archive 18 easily enough. --] (]) 20:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
::Er, I think comparing a man distressed about your (false) report of his brother's death, attempting to find out details of said death to "vandals" and people engaging in "incivility and harrassment" is rather offensive and insensitive. I don't really care if you choose to make yourself unavailable by email, however, I do care when I have to deal with distressed people who are forced to create an account specifically to talk to you, come to this page and reveal personal information about themselves and their families in order to communicate such concerns to you, only to have you archive the conversation unreasonably quickly, expecting such a person to root around your userspace trying to work out your very eccentric behaviour. ] 00:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
:For the residual material relating to this matter, please see my Archived talk page: ]. There reason that there are ellipses relates to ]. See ] for the related discussion. The error itself is excised pursuant to ]. I provided the necessary ellipses after learning of the problem via the post. To rehash it here is not useful. I dealt with it as appropriately as I could. Errors sometimes exist in sources; I edited in good faith and I responded in good faith. This rehashing of a matter that has ellipses in it for reasons of ] is not helpful. --] (]) 22:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
::I think it is helpful because, despite what you suggest, it was never addressed at the time and it seems an appropriate time to raise it now that other administrators above (Hesperian and Moondyne) have raised their own concerns about your talk page practices. Yes, your false report and inability to cite a source for the material was discussed between you and Mr Achtert, but it certainly wasn't addressed internally and nor was the eccentric way you handled it. ] 00:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

'''Please stop archiving this page while people are still posting to this discussion. Your behaviour is disruptive, please stop it now.''' ] 00:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
*********************************************************************************************

==Disrupting my talk page==
I have asked people to stop posting about these matters on my talk page; the posts are disrupting more than my talk page; they are disrupting my work schedule and my life. I am very tired and I want to rest. I recovered from a recent month-long illness early in January, and I have no desire to fall ill again because of what ''I'' am regarding as disruptive activity by others (not I) on my (yes, my) Misplaced Pages talk page. '''Please stop disrupting my talk page, my work schedule, and my life.''' Please demonstrate some compassion. Thank you. --] (]) 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC) ] (]) 22:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)]
:For those who need such guidance, before posting anything on my current talk page, please see: ] and ] (sec. on User talk pages), particularly ], and the other links at top of page, as well as my "N.B." sec. Thank you. (Updated. This will all be archived shortly.) ---] (]) 23:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
NYScholar, this page is provided for other users to communicate with you. The way you are currently conducting, telling good faith editors and administrators to buzz off and stop disturbing you is not acceptable. I think if you have 'real life' work you need to do and you find other editors on Misplaced Pages an annoying distraction, you really ought to stop logging onto the site until you've finished your work and have time to respond to people's questions and concerns. Frankly, you shouldn't be editing Misplaced Pages if you're not prepared to respond to your fellow editors. Also, please consider using the 'preview' button and ensuring your post is complete and correct before posting it instead of making half-a-dozen minor edits to every post you make, catching people in multiple edit conflicts. ] 23:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

] (]) 00:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)]
:'''I am '''''also''''' a "good faith editor": ]. Everyone makes typographical errors; not every bothers to take the time to correct them. I do so in an attempt to have accuracy in articles in Misplaced Pages. (Updated.) --] (]) 00:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC) :'''I am '''''also''''' a "good faith editor": ]. Everyone makes typographical errors; not every bothers to take the time to correct them. I do so in an attempt to have accuracy in articles in Misplaced Pages. (Updated.) --] (]) 00:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
********************************************************************************************** **********************************************************************************************

Revision as of 01:16, 10 February 2008

NYScholar is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This is NYScholar's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28
Skip to table of contents

Disclaimer: NYScholar is not in any way affiliated with a personal website called nyscholar.com. This Misplaced Pages log-in identity is simply descriptive: "NYScholar" is an academic scholar who resides in New York. This Misplaced Pages log-in identity, used since June 30, 2005, pre-dates the existence of that website, which began on January 30, 2007.


Talk · Userboxes  · Barnstars  · Contributions  · Misplaced Pages Copyright-related Issues N.B.: Please do not copy my comments placed on my talk page or other talk pages or editing histories of articles, or other Misplaced Pages pages, take them out of context, and/or move them elsewhere. Doing so distorts them. Thank you.

Further information: § N.B., WP:UP, WP:TPG, and WP:CIVIL
Talk archives

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

N.B.

  • Please see the tags at the top of this page. I move comments that others add to this page if I perceive them to have been misdirected and/or I archive them. This is my User talk page. I archive comments when and as I wish. That is my prerogative. You can find them in the archive or moved to where they should be placed. Not here.
  • Please do not post any more comments on my talk page (if at all possible). Having already expended a great deal of my time to respond expeditiously, patiently, and courteously to earlier comments, I simply cannot and do not want to take the time to deal with them any further.
  • As already requested above: Please place comments about making improvements to articles on the talk pages of those articles. Thank you.
  • Due to my own other priorities (related to my own professional work and travel schedule), I am turning back to focusing on my own non-Misplaced Pages related work. Thanks very much to those who do understand for understanding. I appreciate your compassion.
  • Since first posting this, I have attempted to make some corrections to and to update a few articles that I have worked hard on recently, but I really do need to focus on my own work in order to get it done on schedule. I have to go offline to do it. For extended periods of time, I will not be logging back into Misplaced Pages.
  • Earlier discussions are in my "Talk archives".
  • The abbreviation "tc" in my editing box summaries stands for "typographical corrections."

Further information: § N.B., WP:UP, WP:TPG, and WP:CIVIL

Skip to table of contents

Please explain

Where are the personal attacks? It's a completely false accusation and should be retracted immediately. —Moondyne 11:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Warning re: disruption

NYScholar, your behaviour at this user talk page has become disruptive. It is not really your talk page; it is everyone's, for use in talking to you. Your constant removal of legitimate messages, along with your request that people not post here, amount to a refusal to communicate with your peers. Unfortunately, there are plenty of reasons why people need to, and have every right to, talk to you, so long as you intend to remain a part of this community. For example, I notice that you accused Moondyne of a personal attack, and when he posted here to ask you to substantiate or withdraw that accusation, you simply removed the message unreplied.

I'm now giving you a formal warning that your management of this talk page is disruptive, because it is likely to cause anger and frustration amongst your collaborators. If it continues, I may act to prevent this disruption by blocking you from editing, for a time.

I have restored Moondyne's message above. It requires a considered response.

Feel free to archive this message once you've read it. Hesperian 12:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

This "user talk page" is "my" "user talk page" in the sense that I am the "user" identified on it. In that sense, it is "my user talk page"; in Misplaced Pages one refers to "Hesperian's talk page", "NYScholar's talk page" and so on. One knows what I mean when I say "my talk page": it is pointing to which talk page one is referring to. Misplaced Pages provides "leaway" for user talk pages: it says so right in descriptions of "user space." --NYScholar (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I have repeatedly asked this person not to keep posting these misleading messages on my talk page. The person will not stop. I responded cordially to a request for a "favour" (see archive 18), thanked the person on that person's own talk page and received nothing but grief since then. I have had it with this person. There is no further response that I can make. I will archive this discussion tomorrow. After spending an enormous amount of my time correcting errors and trying to improve an article, I am tired, and I do not want to deal with this other person. I suggest that you read the comments on the person's own talk page and at Talk:Heath Ledger and get a fuller and fairer picture of what is going on here. I will archive all of this tomorrow. But I will spend no more of my time responding to that other user, who does not recognize cordiality or courteous behavior and, in my view, is violating WP:CIVIL. (I spent over a half hour responding to the requested "favour" and changed both my user page and my talk page presentation in doing so. Those changes are the only ones that I want to take my time to make (and they were considerable changes). I am turning back to my other non-Misplaced Pages work for the rest of the weekend (at least). Good day! --NYScholar (talk) 12:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
As far as what user talk pages are for, I've linked in two places above already to WP:TPG; I've read them, and I know what they are. Talk pages are not for harrassing other users, and that is what that other user has been using my talk page for lately: see Archive 18, where at first I excepted that user from such behavior; right after I did that, the user started harrassing me on my current talk page. If the user keeps doing it, I will keep deleting the comments and/or archiving them, or moving them to the user's own talk page. I've given fair warning in "N.B." above (which has been there for months in one form or another.) Good day! I'm logging out. --NYScholar (talk) 12:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't post warnings lightly; I had already reviewed the situation thoroughly. It is entirely reasonable that you be required to substantiate or withdraw your accusation, even if it does take a few minutes for you to do so. My position remains that Moondyne's message requires a considered response. Hesperian 12:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
What "accusation"? The person is upsetting me; I'm entitled to say that and to ask the person to stop doing it. I consider continually posting on a talk page when one has been asked not to do so "harrassment." I've made myself very clear. I also explained that I had other work to do that I would rather be doing, so I will turn to it. Against my own better judgment relating to my own time constraints, I spent the entire night working on correcting errors and trying to improve the article Heath Ledger; I have run out of time or energy or desire to (1) work on it anymore and (2) to deal with others who mostly must engage in talk page discussion and don't spend as much time actually working to improve the articles. There is a difference. I'll look at the link later. This is my own response to what the person is generally asking me: I made my complaint clear on the person's own talk page: the complaint is: I've asked you not to keep upsetting me on my talk page, and yet you keep doing it. That should be clear enough. The person's editing summaries about my work breach WP:CIVIL and the person cited an early version of a passage that I later revised as if it had not been revised, describing it in negative terms, which breaches other WP. I've already also made that clear. What the person is doing is uncivil and a form of taunting. User space is user space, and user talk pages give users some leaway in how they present them. I have explained how I prefer to use mine, and that I do not want to discuss how to improve articles on my talk page. Those discussions are for the talk pages of articles. --NYScholar (talk) 12:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You have stated on Talk:Heath Ledger: "I would appreciate it if the above user (Moondyne) (and some others) would stop these ridiculous personal attacks". That is clearly and unambiguously an accusation against Moondyne. My position remains the same: it is disruptive for you to make such an accusation, then ignore a request to either prove it or withdraw it. Hesperian 12:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I wrote an explanation just now and lost it. The beginning of the focus on me instead of on the edit (violating WP:NPA: focus on the content not the contributor) began with the labeling of a subsequently-revised sentence as a "rant" and "fluff" etc.Diffs. and moved toward a further breach of WP:CIVIL with the user's focusing back on the same earlier version of the sentence and even linking to it (to have the descriptions show up again) rather than to focus on the fact that the sentence had already been revised (by me) and quoted on Talk:Heath Ledger for further discussion. Then the user came to my talk page asked me to do him/her a "favour," involving changing the layout of my talk page, which I spent a half hour or so doing, after which I thanked the user on his/her own talk page. Without any acknowledgment that I had even complied with the requested "favour," the user then started posting still more stuff on my talk page even though I had courteously asked the user not to do so and s/he continued to do so above, despite my continuing requests on his/her talk page not to do so. Completely disregarding another user's request for desisting from this is in my view an implicit personal attack, a clear sign of total disrespect for another's clearly-expressed wishes. I also had to delete some harrassment from another user. Focusing on me, the contributor, instead of on the actual nature of the edits themselves (without negatively labeling them as a "rant" or "fluff" when they are actually good-faith edits) is, in my view, a violation of WP:Etiquette, WP:CIVIL, and WP:NPA (the admonition to focus on the content not on the contributor). Going to someone's talk page to ask a "favour" and then not acknowledging compliance with such a requested favour and going back to complain further, despite being asked several times not to do so, is, in my view, a veiled personal attack, harrassment, and a violation of WP:CIVIL. --21:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
See the clearcut knowledge that the user had that the "diffs." link s/he gave to rehash an already-revised matter was to an obsolete version of a sentence: Talk:Heath Ledger#Deletion of pertinent well-sourced material and its sources and .Diffs. To me there seems to be a personal animus involved in that maneuver, and I took it as a personal attack on me, which was totally unnecessary, gratuitous, and not in any way related to the then-current editing of the article in a manner to improve it, as the sentence had already been revised (improved), whether or not the user liked the more recent version any better than the earlier version; the rehashing violated WP:AGF (as well).] --NYScholar (talk) 21:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I must say that I've been very concerned about NYScholar's use of this page for a couple of months now and have kept his/her page on my watchlist as a result. I had to contact NYScholar because the foundation was contacted by the brother of a man NYScholar claimed had died but in reality was still alive. The brother hadn't had recent contact and was distressed to learn of his brother's "death" via a google search of his name. He wished to talk to NYScholar to find out the details of his brother's "death". Only NYScholar declined email contact saying s/he prefers all contact to be on site (fair enough, I suppose). This forced the brother to register for an account specifically to come to this page to talk to NYScholar but a couple of hours after responding, NYScholar archived his/her talk page. It seemed rather rude to me that NYScholar would claim a man had died, causing his family great distress only to immediately archive the thead. Do you think someone who has never used Misplaced Pages before and who came here to address such a matter would have seen NYScholar's reply in the couple of hours it was posted? Would he have known where to find the archived reply or would he have thought his message had simply been deleted without response and then given up in disgust? Makes you wonder what kind of message people unfamiliar with Misplaced Pages must get. I had to apologise to the poor man several times. Sarah 13:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an unnecessary discussion. It was already discussed. I apologized for the error (more than once), which was an error that I found in one of the sources that I had consulted. I have actually spoken the the MLA about this matter (I am a lifetime member of that organization). The person in question was a former editor of the MLA Bibliography whose departure from the MLA is not explained on its site. See the archived talk page discussions about this matter, with all the relevant links: I corrected the problem in the article citations and text and any others relating to it, including talk pages and apologized as soon as I learned of it. (Seldom does one encounter a family member who has been in such infrequent contact with a relative that he or she does not know whether or not the person is alive or dead. I guessed at the problem without being in contact via e-mail, and I guessed correctly and made the changes to the article and talk page without even being asked to do so.)

Note well: I do not use personal e-mail in Misplaced Pages for good reason. I cannot and have no wish to deal with the types of incivility and harrassment that I encounter on talk pages of Misplaced Pages in my professional (personal) e-mail account from people who apparently have nothing better to do than to vandalize Misplaced Pages or to attack others in talk pages. "Preferences" in Misplaced Pages exist for the use and protection of Misplaced Pages users who select them from clearly designed options. I have with good reason and entirely appropriately selected the option of not using e-mail with Misplaced Pages and Wikipedians. No one should be pressuring me to do so. No one should be suggesting that my choice of not using e-mail is in any way in conflict with WP:POL. It is not. I will be archiving the entire discussion from this point above shortly. One can find it in my archive 18 easily enough. --NYScholar (talk) 20:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Er, I think comparing a man distressed about your (false) report of his brother's death, attempting to find out details of said death to "vandals" and people engaging in "incivility and harrassment" is rather offensive and insensitive. I don't really care if you choose to make yourself unavailable by email, however, I do care when I have to deal with distressed people who are forced to create an account specifically to talk to you, come to this page and reveal personal information about themselves and their families in order to communicate such concerns to you, only to have you archive the conversation unreasonably quickly, expecting such a person to root around your userspace trying to work out your very eccentric behaviour. Sarah 00:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
For the residual material relating to this matter, please see my Archived talk page: MLA Style Manual]. There reason that there are ellipses relates to WP:BLP. See Talk:The MLA Style Manual for the related discussion. The error itself is excised pursuant to WP:BLP. I provided the necessary ellipses after learning of the problem via the post. To rehash it here is not useful. I dealt with it as appropriately as I could. Errors sometimes exist in sources; I edited in good faith and I responded in good faith. This rehashing of a matter that has ellipses in it for reasons of WP:BLP is not helpful. --NYScholar (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I think it is helpful because, despite what you suggest, it was never addressed at the time and it seems an appropriate time to raise it now that other administrators above (Hesperian and Moondyne) have raised their own concerns about your talk page practices. Yes, your false report and inability to cite a source for the material was discussed between you and Mr Achtert, but it certainly wasn't addressed internally and nor was the eccentric way you handled it. Sarah 00:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop archiving this page while people are still posting to this discussion. Your behaviour is disruptive, please stop it now. Sarah 00:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Disrupting my talk page

I have asked people to stop posting about these matters on my talk page; the posts are disrupting more than my talk page; they are disrupting my work schedule and my life. I am very tired and I want to rest. I recovered from a recent month-long illness early in January, and I have no desire to fall ill again because of what I am regarding as disruptive activity by others (not I) on my (yes, my) Misplaced Pages talk page. Please stop disrupting my talk page, my work schedule, and my life. Please demonstrate some compassion. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

For those who need such guidance, before posting anything on my current talk page, please see: WP:TPG and Misplaced Pages:User page (sec. on User talk pages), particularly Misplaced Pages:User page#Removal of comments, warnings, and the other links at top of page, as well as my "N.B." sec. Thank you. (Updated. This will all be archived shortly.) ---NYScholar (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

NYScholar, this page is provided for other users to communicate with you. The way you are currently conducting, telling good faith editors and administrators to buzz off and stop disturbing you is not acceptable. I think if you have 'real life' work you need to do and you find other editors on Misplaced Pages an annoying distraction, you really ought to stop logging onto the site until you've finished your work and have time to respond to people's questions and concerns. Frankly, you shouldn't be editing Misplaced Pages if you're not prepared to respond to your fellow editors. Also, please consider using the 'preview' button and ensuring your post is complete and correct before posting it instead of making half-a-dozen minor edits to every post you make, catching people in multiple edit conflicts. Sarah 23:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I am also a "good faith editor": WP:AGF. Everyone makes typographical errors; not every bothers to take the time to correct them. I do so in an attempt to have accuracy in articles in Misplaced Pages. (Updated.) --NYScholar (talk) 00:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

WARNING

I am following WP:POL re: talk pages. I can delete and/or archive comments after I read them. DO NOT DELETE MY OWN COMMENTS FROM THIS TALK PAGE. THAT IS VANDALISM. Please stop micromanaging my talk page. --NYScholar (talk) 00:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Further information: § N.B., WP:UP, WP:TPG, and WP:CIVIL

Skip to table of contents