| Revision as of 16:11, 5 February 2009 editElonka (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators70,958 edits Did anyone consider just asking him to delete the page?← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:14, 5 February 2009 edit undoIronholds (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers79,705 edits replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| *'''Delete''' As it says in ], and I quote the 'Things you shouldn't have in user space' section, ''Material that can be viewed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws. The compilation of factual evidence (diffs) in user subpages, for purposes such as preparing for a dispute resolution process, is permitted provided the dispute resolution process is started in a timely manner. Users should not maintain in public view negative information on others without very good reason.''. That annother user has come across PR's page and started using it for such last october shows that it isn't harmless to just have lying around. Frankly much of his subpage system is riddled with sticking a middl finger up at the community, such as ], where he attacks various admin and people using diffs and basically shows that, despite the long block history, he hasn't learnt much. I am pleased to see he does admit at least one of his blocks was correct (though even that has attempts of justification). I have engaged withPR over the last couple of years and nothing in that has convinced me we should make exceptions to policy in this case. <span style="font-famiy: verdana;"> --] ~ ] • </span> 15:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' As it says in ], and I quote the 'Things you shouldn't have in user space' section, ''Material that can be viewed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws. The compilation of factual evidence (diffs) in user subpages, for purposes such as preparing for a dispute resolution process, is permitted provided the dispute resolution process is started in a timely manner. Users should not maintain in public view negative information on others without very good reason.''. That annother user has come across PR's page and started using it for such last october shows that it isn't harmless to just have lying around. Frankly much of his subpage system is riddled with sticking a middl finger up at the community, such as ], where he attacks various admin and people using diffs and basically shows that, despite the long block history, he hasn't learnt much. I am pleased to see he does admit at least one of his blocks was correct (though even that has attempts of justification). I have engaged withPR over the last couple of years and nothing in that has convinced me we should make exceptions to policy in this case. <span style="font-famiy: verdana;"> --] ~ ] • </span> 15:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Comment'''. I am in agreement that the page is inappropriate, and a violation of ]. However, it is also several months old, and has not received any new edits in quite some time. Did anyone consider perhaps, just, you know, ''asking'' PalestineRemembered to delete the page, rather than going to the trouble of an MfD? PR, if you'd like to speed things up here, just add {{tl|db-owner}} to the top of the page, and we can get this speedy-closed. --]]] 16:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | * '''Comment'''. I am in agreement that the page is inappropriate, and a violation of ]. However, it is also several months old, and has not received any new edits in quite some time. Did anyone consider perhaps, just, you know, ''asking'' PalestineRemembered to delete the page, rather than going to the trouble of an MfD? PR, if you'd like to speed things up here, just add {{tl|db-owner}} to the top of the page, and we can get this speedy-closed. --]]] 16:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| *:I thought that asking would be an exercise in futility; however 'unwarranted' PR claims his numerous blocks have been he has a reputation as a stubborn and irascible editor. ] (]) 16:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:14, 5 February 2009
User:PalestineRemembered/Cheating
A completely inappropriate thing to store in userspace; userspace is not to be used for maintaining pages designed to slander other editors. Such a page never will be an appropriate thing to maintain despite the claim of the user on his userpage that 'some day, it will be necessary to name and shame editors who give every sign of deliberate cheating'. Maintaining such a 'laundry list' is inappropriate; the fact that it only contains a WP:SOAPBOXy complaint whining about accusations against him doesn't counter the fact that the purpose of the page is a clear violation of WP:ATTACK. Ironholds (talk) 15:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete As it says in WP:USERSPACE, and I quote the 'Things you shouldn't have in user space' section, Material that can be viewed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws. The compilation of factual evidence (diffs) in user subpages, for purposes such as preparing for a dispute resolution process, is permitted provided the dispute resolution process is started in a timely manner. Users should not maintain in public view negative information on others without very good reason.. That annother user has come across PR's page and started using it for such last october shows that it isn't harmless to just have lying around. Frankly much of his subpage system is riddled with sticking a middl finger up at the community, such as his Block History subpage, where he attacks various admin and people using diffs and basically shows that, despite the long block history, he hasn't learnt much. I am pleased to see he does admit at least one of his blocks was correct (though even that has attempts of justification). I have engaged withPR over the last couple of years and nothing in that has convinced me we should make exceptions to policy in this case. --Narson ~ Talk • 15:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. I am in agreement that the page is inappropriate, and a violation of WP:ATP. However, it is also several months old, and has not received any new edits in quite some time. Did anyone consider perhaps, just, you know, asking PalestineRemembered to delete the page, rather than going to the trouble of an MfD? PR, if you'd like to speed things up here, just add {{db-owner}} to the top of the page, and we can get this speedy-closed. --Elonka 16:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I thought that asking would be an exercise in futility; however 'unwarranted' PR claims his numerous blocks have been he has a reputation as a stubborn and irascible editor. Ironholds (talk) 16:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)