| Revision as of 22:02, 9 August 2005 editVizcarra (talk | contribs)10,395 edits 46th article← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:52, 12 August 2005 edit undoVizcarra (talk | contribs)10,395 edits The incident against a biased groupNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==Current Project== | |||
| ===Introduction=== | |||
| On ] I had my first encounter with the group or individual ]/]/] while editing ] to attempt to level the article to a Neutral Point of View. These individuals seem to have formed a team (see | |||
| ]). These three users seem to have | |||
| ===Events=== | |||
| 1. #On ] they divided reverts to play out of the rule of ] (using their same argument, by the way, of <<>>). I reverted edits that were made without consensus was reached. | |||
| 2. After the third revert of my part I received this message from | |||
| <<>> (Message sent seconds before or minutes after being reported to friend SlimVirgin). | |||
| I reverted and rephrased the controversial comment. | |||
| 3. I then received a message from SlimVirgin: | |||
| <<>> | |||
| Then I replied to him: | |||
| >>. | |||
| 4. Tried to revert again, but my edit kept appearing as yet another edit. | |||
| I got this message from SlimVirgin: | |||
| <<>> (second request to edit the article). | |||
| <<>> (although his friends did not comply to this ) | |||
| 5. Then from Jayg: | |||
| <<>>. | |||
| ===Being blocked=== | |||
| Which caused SlimVirgin to block me. | |||
| <<. | |||
| Then I was block not for 24 hours by him but for 48 hours. | |||
| I was blocked from ] to ], for an unkown reason. | |||
| ==Quotes== | |||
| ====By ]==== | |||
| *<<>> | |||
| *<<>>] | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| *<<>> | |||
| *<<>> | |||
| *To Goodoldpolonius2: <<. | |||
| ==== By ] ==== | |||
| *<<>> (end of sentence). | |||
| *<< | |||
| *<< | |||
| *<<To Goodoldpolonius2 ] | |||
| ==Conclusion== | |||
| I don't know if these three users are the same, since SlimVirgin seems slightly more objective than the other ones. But, why in the world would you invite your friends to go and support you and leave the other party that tries to balance the POV alone. That is clearly not an ethical move. | |||
| I realized later how the 4 of these individuals seem to focus on Jewish-related articles and have frequently conversed with one another and it's easy to side with each other. So, it's no surprise that it was a losing battle, a battle against bias that I've lost. | |||
| <!-- | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| ]This '''Azteca''' Tireless Contributor Barnstar is presented to David Vizcarrra for his dedication and continous work on ] related articles. Presented by ] 04:04, July 21, 2005 (UTC)]] | ]This '''Azteca''' Tireless Contributor Barnstar is presented to David Vizcarrra for his dedication and continous work on ] related articles. Presented by ] 04:04, July 21, 2005 (UTC)]] | ||
| Line 15: | Line 81: | ||
| * To write articles about ]. | * To write articles about ]. | ||
| * To clean up ]. | * To clean up ]. | ||
| --> | -- > | ||
| ==My contributions== | ==My contributions== | ||
| ===Images I have uploaded=== | ===Images I have uploaded=== | ||
| Line 106: | Line 172: | ||
| ==Fans== | ==Fans== | ||
| *]. Edits (almost) every page I create not to long after my last edit. | *]. Edits (almost) every page I create not to long after my last edit. | ||
| --> | -- > | ||
| ==External links== | ==External links== | ||
| Line 120: | Line 186: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| --> | |||
Revision as of 21:52, 12 August 2005
Current Project
Introduction
On August 10 I had my first encounter with the group or individual SlimVirgin/Jayjg/Jpgordon while editing Anti-semitism to attempt to level the article to a Neutral Point of View. These individuals seem to have formed a team (see User:SlimVirginjayjgJpgordon). These three users seem to have
Events
1. #On Anti-Semitism they divided reverts to play out of the rule of 3RR (using their same argument, by the way, of <<revert game-playing complex reverts masked as "re-phraising">>). I reverted edits that were made without consensus was reached.
2. After the third revert of my part I received this message from
<<I strongly recommend that you revert yourself before you are blocked for this>> (Message sent seconds before or minutes after being reported to friend SlimVirgin).
I reverted and rephrased the controversial comment.
3. I then received a message from SlimVirgin:
Then I replied to him:
4. Tried to revert again, but my edit kept appearing as yet another edit.
I got this message from SlimVirgin: <<>> (second request to edit the article).
<<...it's best to look for a compromise on the talk pages and wait for that to emerge, rather than reverting back and forth.>> (although his friends did not comply to this )
5. Then from Jayg:
Being blocked
Which caused SlimVirgin to block me.
<<You did another partial revert, so you've been temporarily blocked from editing.
Then I was block not for 24 hours by him but for 48 hours.
I was blocked from August 10 to August 12, for an unkown reason.
Quotes
By Jayjg
- <<As a prominent member of the "Jewish supremacist" cabal, I naturally support this attempt by Jews and Jew-lovers to supress free speech and oppress the white race. ;-)>>
- <<Jayjg and SlimVirgin are controversial admins. I am still waiting for the exact post or edit that was the reason for the August block. I have yet to receive and answer. They are dishonest about it, and they know it. So, please prove your reason was a rules violation rather than your personal bias. Prove the exact "disruption" of any August 2005 edit. I will continue to ask for it. There is a policy of WP:NPA, so show the "disruption" already, and let Misplaced Pages be done with it. Thanks.>>69.209.218.98
jpgordon
- <<I'm contentious because you've acted unilaterally...>>
- <<What the heck are you asking him to prove?>>
- To Goodoldpolonius2: <<sheesh. I'm not sure how to pound sense into User:Vizcarra's head.
By Goodoldpolonius2
- <<Huh?>> (end of sentence).
- <<This is silly.
- <<Vizcarra, your reversion criteria is totally ridiculous
- <<To Goodoldpolonius2Why the revert? and why no comment? 62.252.0.7
Conclusion
I don't know if these three users are the same, since SlimVirgin seems slightly more objective than the other ones. But, why in the world would you invite your friends to go and support you and leave the other party that tries to balance the POV alone. That is clearly not an ethical move.
I realized later how the 4 of these individuals seem to focus on Jewish-related articles and have frequently conversed with one another and it's easy to side with each other. So, it's no surprise that it was a losing battle, a battle against bias that I've lost.