| Revision as of 21:05, 4 September 2014 editSrich32977 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers299,612 edits →IMO: Request← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:13, 4 September 2014 edit undoSPECIFICO (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users35,510 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| {{ec}} | {{ec}} | ||
| :::::::::::You said "way too biased" and "obvious biases". These remarks, especially when brought up on Gender Project discussions, imply gender-bias ''and other bias''. It easily construed as a personal attack. If you would be so kind as to replace "biased" and "biases" with "nick-picking pain in the butt", I'd be quite happy. – ] (]) 21:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | :::::::::::You said "way too biased" and "obvious biases". These remarks, especially when brought up on Gender Project discussions, imply gender-bias ''and other bias''. It easily construed as a personal attack. If you would be so kind as to replace "biased" and "biases" with "nick-picking pain in the butt", I'd be quite happy. – ] (]) 21:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::::::::I suspect that some of the editors on the GG talk page misunderstand the use of "bias" in that context. A less upsetting example of bias in the real world is due to the fact that 70% or more of humans are right-handed. This leads to systemic bias against left-handedness in product design, common speech, and many other areas. If WP editor population is overwhelmingly male, similar biases may result. That does not justify the inference that there is hateful intention behind the evident effects of such bias. This should be obvious on a Project with the hallmark Pillar "AGF" but unfortunately that is not the case. ]] 21:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == A Barnstar for you! == | == A Barnstar for you! == | ||
Revision as of 21:13, 4 September 2014
Green Box Links to Barnstars, Archives, Other Stuff   See here for my Arbitration-related topic ban info. |
|---|
 |
 | This user wants to see everything in its place. |
ARBCOM clarification request regarding use of "TERF"
I have initiated a request for clarification from the ARBCOM regarding the use of "TERF" per discussions on Talk:Radical feminism. I am messaging you because you have been involved in past discussions regarding this issue and may wish to participate in the new discussion at the ARBCOM. The discussion can be found here. Thank you and best wishes. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Two kinds of pork
User:Two kinds of pork, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Two kinds of pork and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Two kinds of pork during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Two kinds of pork (talk) 04:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
IMO
The recent thread you posted is a non-starter. By including 3 editors, you set up a situation where the discussion will be diverse x3 and feckless x3. If there are specific WP:TPNO issues with particular editors which need addressing, they should be brought up one-by-one as they occur. If there is an overall pattern with any particular editor, you could start a RFC/U as to the editor. (Above all, bringing up editor behavior problems on the Gender Project talk page would be most unworthwhile.) I urge you to withdraw the thread/close the discussion as soon as possible. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, is Jimbo a participant on the project? Since he is not, what is the point of posting a notice on his talkpage? It looks like an effort to drag someone onto the drama board. Again, I urge you to closeout the discussion. Say so to me and I will do so on your behalf. I will simply say "Upon further consideration, OP has determined that pursuance of this particular thread would no be helpful to WP as a whole nor to the Gender project. – S. Rich (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
As I thought would happen, the discussion deteriorated. Among other things, various editors were saying "so-and-so should be banned for having these-and-those opinions", and "you are making a personal attack on me". I have "closed" the discussion with a {{NOTHERE}} template. – S. Rich (talk) 17:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You aren't an admin and others are expressing concerns so I think you should take you opinion off the top of the posting and put your own opinions in there just like any other editor. Another nail in your administrators coffin?? Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Please note in the ANI instructions the ANI calls for the attention/intervention of administrators and experienced editors. If I was an admin, I would have archived it. In any event, you will see that nothing will come of your thread. There is some risk of a boomerang. First, the thread reflects badly on you. Second, a thread about a Project talk page diverts attention from the actual goals of the Project. The real work on the problem is listed at WP:CSBOT. – S. Rich (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You can't get any work done if every constructive comment is badgered. Do you think that should be allowed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Palestine or WP:Wikiproject Israel? Think about it. Hard. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Regrettably, the ANI you opened is not constructive. You can see so by the results thus far. (I have not looked at Palestine or Israel, but suspect that similar long, drawn-out, endless discussions about the opinions of others would not be constructive either.) I and another editor have tried to close the ANI without success. And I am sad to see that Admins are contributing to the drama rather than dropping the curtain. – S. Rich (talk) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- I think it's going well, getting a good discussion going, etc. So we'll have to agree to disagree.
- I wonder if it will end up in the new government funded study of sexism on Misplaced Pages. (See Resources list.) I assume they'll be reading all the relevant threads. Also assume they won't use real names, knock wood.
- By the way, I've read that more males get raped by other males in the military than females. Perhaps you have some insights on this or know about some abstruse military sources that might be open to the public. Or that we could do FOIs on? Something I just have a couple articles on right now from a year ago; haven't thoroughly research. And, as always, so many articles, so little time. Sexual assault in the United States military is the relevant article. I guess I can start by at least throwing in the couple refs I have saying it's more guys, though of course they rarely report it. (It seems it was a higly reliable source.) Thanks. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 20:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- BTW, the Barnstar below, for your editing efforts, is certainly deserved. Congrats. But I wish you'd withdraw the WP:ASPERSIONS you made about me being biased. Such is hardly the case. (And I dont know anything about the male/female rape issue. I presume you mean FOIA, but crafting one would be difficult.) – S. Rich (talk) 20:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)20:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- There are all kinds of bias, including based on past experience in different situations. I could replace it with "pain in the butt".
Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 20:45, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- WP is not intended to be an outlet for your real-life activism of whatever stripe. That's the basis of your problem. Srich is your best friend here, from what I can see. SPECIFICO talk 21:00, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- There are all kinds of bias, including based on past experience in different situations. I could replace it with "pain in the butt".
- BTW, the Barnstar below, for your editing efforts, is certainly deserved. Congrats. But I wish you'd withdraw the WP:ASPERSIONS you made about me being biased. Such is hardly the case. (And I dont know anything about the male/female rape issue. I presume you mean FOIA, but crafting one would be difficult.) – S. Rich (talk) 20:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)20:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Regrettably, the ANI you opened is not constructive. You can see so by the results thus far. (I have not looked at Palestine or Israel, but suspect that similar long, drawn-out, endless discussions about the opinions of others would not be constructive either.) I and another editor have tried to close the ANI without success. And I am sad to see that Admins are contributing to the drama rather than dropping the curtain. – S. Rich (talk) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You can't get any work done if every constructive comment is badgered. Do you think that should be allowed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Palestine or WP:Wikiproject Israel? Think about it. Hard. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Please note in the ANI instructions the ANI calls for the attention/intervention of administrators and experienced editors. If I was an admin, I would have archived it. In any event, you will see that nothing will come of your thread. There is some risk of a boomerang. First, the thread reflects badly on you. Second, a thread about a Project talk page diverts attention from the actual goals of the Project. The real work on the problem is listed at WP:CSBOT. – S. Rich (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You said "way too biased" and "obvious biases". These remarks, especially when brought up on Gender Project discussions, imply gender-bias and other bias. It easily construed as a personal attack. If you would be so kind as to replace "biased" and "biases" with "nick-picking pain in the butt", I'd be quite happy. – S. Rich (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- I suspect that some of the editors on the GG talk page misunderstand the use of "bias" in that context. A less upsetting example of bias in the real world is due to the fact that 70% or more of humans are right-handed. This leads to systemic bias against left-handedness in product design, common speech, and many other areas. If WP editor population is overwhelmingly male, similar biases may result. That does not justify the inference that there is hateful intention behind the evident effects of such bias. This should be obvious on a Project with the hallmark Pillar "AGF" but unfortunately that is not the case. SPECIFICO talk 21:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You said "way too biased" and "obvious biases". These remarks, especially when brought up on Gender Project discussions, imply gender-bias and other bias. It easily construed as a personal attack. If you would be so kind as to replace "biased" and "biases" with "nick-picking pain in the butt", I'd be quite happy. – S. Rich (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
| Well behaved women rarely make history - or change male dominated editing environments.Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:27, 4 September 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks. What was that Cole Porter song? Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 20:39, 4 September 2014 (UTC)