Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:02, 14 July 2012

Archives

2010 2011 2012

Disclaimer Any opinions expressed on Misplaced Pages, sister projects or in tweets and blog posts are mine and do not represent the opinion of Wikimedia UK or any other organization that I am affiliated with. – Fæ

Just quit already

You're gonna burn in this world and the next! Best admin evar ! Ash=Fae=F4g (talk) 04:43, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

This comment fits a coordinated pattern I have seen of personal homophobic harassment directed against me over the last month on Twitter, Misplaced Pages Review, email, Wikimedia Commons and Misplaced Pages. I would like those that keep an eye on my user page to take note and reflect on whether the harassment policies we have for the Wikimedia projects are able to act effectively or efficiently when anonymous accounts, low contribution sock puppet accounts and manipulative traveling circuses are used to attack members of our community. Not all such attacks are as obvious as this one. Thanks Fæ (talk) 08:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

• Just my 2 cents, I would have just WP:RBI and this thread wouldn't have existed to manifest that further. --Dave 09:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

• Too many people would not believe that this kind of talk exists if they did not see it. People who are not LGBT supporters do not have this happen to them. This has happened to me also on Misplaced Pages and it is scary that people would use their short time on this earth to harass other people. Hiding it in an attempt to keep it from manifesting further is what people have done for most of history, and that has proven to be an incomplete solution. I do not know what the whole solution is, but raising awareness of this reality is part of it. If it were an isolated random incident I would say to delete it, but it is not productive to ask the victims of a persistent, pervasive problem to do their best to prevent public disclosure of it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

• True, but not applying WP:DENY (part of WP:RBI) is just playing right into their hands, no? Moral of the story, why play the victim card? In the 1969 film "Battle of Britain", an irritated ACM Sir Hugh Dowding said: "I'm not very interested in propaganda. If we're right, they'll give up. If we are wrong, they'll be in London in a week!" --Dave 14:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Where I live if anyone spoke those words publicly or graffiti'd them then then no one would say that Fæ was insulted or a victim of vandalism; they would say that he was threatened and the target of a hate crime. Of course things are different at the keyboard but this behavior is representative of deeper problems on Misplaced Pages and as Fæ says there ought to be conversation about other protections. A part of the LGBT rights movement as well as other rights movements for face, religion, and other traits facing discrimination dictates calling for wider recognition of the prejudice against people representing minorities. Fæ is not playing a victim card; he is acting in accord with the movement consensus that allies of minority groups should tell others details about targeted attacks so that more people can understand that this is not a problem that any attack recipient has, but rather a problem which the community has to address. If the community does not hear about it then there can be no community response.

The vandals which ought to be ignored are the ones who are likely to go away. Fæ's situation is extraordinary because among other things it includes attacks off Misplaced Pages. It may not be socially appropriate for him to say that for humility or for not wanting to disturb anyone with his problems, but I confirm that what he is experiencing is hostile for reasons unrelated to his Misplaced Pages behavior. Even if attacks cannot be stopped he should get community support beyond what Misplaced Pages policies say should be afforded to those visited by mere vandals. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:33, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Your Recent Edits

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at Diet of Worms. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The reverted edit can be found here. Yummyanaljuices (talk) 22:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your Recent Edits

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at Diet of Worms. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The reverted edit can be found here. Your Bum is a Waterpark (talk) 17:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Loser

Suck my greatest dick!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Malcolm Betruger (talk • contribs)

The Commons uploading issue

Hi Fae. Do you still have a copy of your original email from Matt Crockett in relation to the Commons discussion? Or can you remember which email account you used to send the message to OTRS - I am unable to find it through the two email accounts I am aware of. SilkTork 17:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I am not near my desktop until the middle of next week. However I believe your question about this Commons image from 2009 has already been answered. --Fæ (talk) 20:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I have found no evidence for the email, so are you saying that it was never sent? Please be as explicit as possible on this issue, as evasion at this point I will take as a yes that there was no email. SilkTork 16:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I have been given a OTRS number which I am now looking for. Hopefully this will be resolved shortly. SilkTork 21:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I have the email which supports what you say that you were given permission by the photographer to upload the image onto Commons. SilkTork 21:29, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

DYKbox protection

Why did you temporarily protect {{DYKbox}}? Your edit comment states high-risk but WP:HRT policy clearly states indefinite protection for high risk and never temporary.

WP:SEMI states:

Semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred, nor should it be used to privilege registered users over unregistered users in (valid) content disputes.

There has been no recent or heavy vandalism so, I request you either remove the protection or make it indefinite under high-risk guidelines. Thank you. 50.53.15.51 (talk) 03:02, 14 July 2012 (UTC)