Misplaced Pages

:Administrators' noticeboard/Personal attacks: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

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.
< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:01, 8 November 2006 editWobble (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers10,640 editsm →{{User|Sugaar}}: comment← Previous edit Revision as of 12:12, 8 November 2006 edit undoShell Kinney (talk | contribs)33,094 editsm →{{User|Sugaar}}: rm report, this page is not a part of dispute resolution, Sugaar has been warned alreadyNext edit →
Line 31: Line 31:




==={{User|Sugaar}}===
From the first time I edited, this user accused me of being Nazi:<br />


"...It's not just because I naturally tend to distrust heavily some new user with a typical Nazi nickname..."<br />

I didnt warn him the first time but I warned him when he told me I'm ranting. But He continued with his accusations <br />

"On the last one, my apologies but sometimes I am rude with people who seem to have a hidden agenda. "Ranting" was maybe inappropiate but my suspicions (conviction) about your political agenda remain untouched." <br />

I told him that I dont care about his suspicions and he should stay on topic. He continued:

"...... You haven't been so explicit but you have not denied either that you are a nazi or have a racist agenda (just thrown balls off: accusing me of being rude or whatever but never denying my suspicions).
Maybe it's an ethnic trait but I like to call things by their name and not to play word games. This may sometimes feel rude for some raised in more hypocritic cultures, I guess, but in fact I'm trying to be polite by means of being 100% honest. Can you think of better ettiquete? If what I say happens to be false. I will apologize. But meanwhile I keep my conviction that I'm on the truth: that you two are members of some racist organization and that you are trying to make Misplaced Pages fit your ideology and serve for your political purposes......"

I leaved the fallowing message to his talk page:

"Please refrain from personal attacks which you made in Talk:White_people. Or next time you will be reported to WP:DP."

He answered:

"I am not making any personal attacks. I honestly think you are a nazi (or close equivalent, if you want to dwell in the small letter and word twists). You haven't even bothered in denying it, so why should I think otherwise."

] 19:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

:The problem is that his ideology, on which he has made no comment other than protesting my conviction, is relevant for the discussion on the article ], where he has directly edited often (in line with his obvious ideology) in spite of the discussion and the consensus.
:I apologized for using the term "ranting", btw. But I won't apologize for something he doesn't even deny to be. Not talking about his (and other editor's) obvious ideology and agenda would do more harm than good.
:I am glad that he's asked this investigation because I guess that some administrator's look at the difficult situation in the relevant article may be of some help. He and specially the other conflictive editor (]) are ], violating ] and ].
:I must say also that the ultimate trigger of this RFI is that I deleted one of his last edits, in full agreement with what other editors thought because it was POV and inconsistent with the article.
:Hope that this will actually help to solve what is probably a case of complex vandalism.
:--] 19:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


*Everyone has a ideology which is relevant to the article on question. However we dont debate everyone's ideology.

*I will neither deny nor accept your personal attacks. I will ignore them and warn you about them and report them if you do not stop. You do not need to apologize, just stop it.

*The other editor (-one-) in the question deleted *parts* of the section because he thought it wasnt properly referenced. I did correct it before you deleted the whole section. ] 19:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

:If your ideology is the one I say it is, I don't know why are you protesting. You surely can't find that offensive, it just bothers you because it difficults somehow your attempts of vandalism with impunity.
:I say you clealry have an ideology (and I spotted it with your first edit). That ideology is relevant for the discussion and you are trying to push all the limits of Misplaced Pages in a politically motivated attempt to take control over sections of it.
:The other editor you mention (]), wrote that he would delete the section in 24 hrs if nobody else did. I did. You reacted with this RFI. --] 20:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

*Please see also the relevant Cabal RFM: ] and its discussion page: ], also asked by Thulean, who seems interested in resorting to all sorts of authorities to try to push ahead with his POV. --] 20:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


*I dont believe this. You were just warned to cease personal attacks by an admin and yet you continue, still implying that I'm a Nazi by saying "I say you clealry have an ideology (and I spotted it with your first edit)".

Not to mention your other speculations:

" it just bothers you because it difficults somehow your attempts of vandalism with impunity."

" That ideology is relevant for the discussion and you are trying to push all the limits of Misplaced Pages in a politically motivated attempt to take control over sections of it. "

I suggest you to read ]

] 21:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

:First: you must admit that you are using the "name-calling" issue to try to impose your viewpoint. You do have an agenda and you are trying to impose it in the relevantarticle against consensus and NPOV.
:Second you reported me for unrelated issues: what triggered your protest wasn't name-calling but actions relevant to the article integrity: a content dispute. You are manipulating this.
:Third: saying that you have an ideology and an agenda, what is blatantly true, cannot constitute a Misplaced Pages policy violation.
:Fourth: you are trolling and I am trying to defend Misplaced Pages NPOV policy, which is relevant to this issue. --] 22:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

'''Administrator blows referee whistle''' - This is not the place to debate ideology. Per the instructions at the top of this noticeboard, page diffs are required for reports here - not unsupported allegations or links to Misplaced Pages discussions. I did a search on Yahoo and did find Nazi websites that use "Thulean" and "Thule" in their titles, so - strong as the statement from Sugaar was - it appears to be fact-based and valid. There are two sides to ] and ] that apply to this particular discussion: first, standards of civility at Misplaced Pages do not depend on what ideology an editor holds; second, discourse on certain sensitive topics may require the judicious use of terms that would otherwise be eschewed as hot button and inflammatory (such as when the topic at hand actually is Nazism and racism). This noticeboard cannot mediate a content dispute. It ''can'' evaluate and take appropriate actions in response to personal attacks. <font face="Verdana">]]<sup>]</sup></font> 23:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

:I appreciate your judicious intervention, Durova, but I already have a warn and want to appeal it. I have just been honest and acted in good faith and in defense of Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. --] 23:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
::If you want me to take any action on this board then you need to provide page diffs. <font face="Verdana">]]<sup>]</sup></font> 23:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
:::What page diffs? The warn? . It reads:
::::''Calling another editor a nazi, regardless of whether you think it is true, is completely unacceptable. If you continue, you may be blocked for ]. Please find a more civil way to discuss your concerns about the article. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)''
:::Thulean's atitude? , , , , , , , , . all them against the consensus and in a clear atempt of making an edit war.
:::You may also want to see his (ahem), where you can see how he's focused in issues as ], ] (most of what he did) and now, while this issue cools off, he seems to have divereted his attention to ], a page that I would gladly "patrol" but not while I'm under warn.
:::You may also want to read ] to see how most users in present and past have tried to achieve a consensus but he and (specially) ] () have kept editing at will ignoring the consensus.
:::The attitude differs somehwat: DT edits under the guise of "minor edit", "fixed link"... but changes the whole article, while Thulean is much more straightforward and "legalist" (using that "legalism" to make threats: he has spammed my talk page with threats of "you'll be blocked", in an obvious attempt to intimiate me). He's very legalist but Misplaced Pages is more than just a bureaucratic institution and I firmly believe that he will not succeed in his manipulation attempts. --] 09:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

*'''PAIN is not a dispute resolution forum.''' Not to be too harsh, but we need to keep things here neat, orderly, and to a pretty narrow subject material. I'm interested in personal attacks; I'll keep an eye on this for the time being, but I'd encourage ''all'' of you to just try to settle down a bit and resolve your differences through the usual ] process instead of trying to get each other blocked. If attacks continue or escalate, please provide ] to support any reports made here. Thanks in advance. ] 09:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
:Sure... but I want my warn reviewed. --] 09:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

*'''Comment''': I think this is something of a waste of time. Whether there was a ''personal attack'' seems to be a question of opinion. Sugaar has made some assumptions about Thulean's political/biological ideologies. His assumptions seem to be founded on Thulean's choice of username and the content of his contributions to both the talk page and the article for ]. The nub of this IMHO is whether Sugaar meant his comments regarding Thulean as an attack upon Thulean, as Thulean maintains, or merely as an observation that Thulean appears to have certain political ideologies that he includes in his edits. Given that it can't really be shown that Sugaar actually ''intended'' to cause offence, or indeed that his intention was to be personal, I think this matter is something of a waste of time. Personal attacks are intended to insult, demean or intimidate the subject, it seems to me that Sugaar was not intending to do this. Thulean may well have been offended by this, but was offence intended? I have had some experience on wikipedia where I have made what I considered quite innocuous statements that North American users have thought of as offensive, there are cultural differences here, we are a large and diverse community, missunderstandings are bound to happen, what is offensive in one culture can be seen as commonplace in another. ] 10:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


==={{User|Jaakko Sivonen}}=== ==={{User|Jaakko Sivonen}}===

Revision as of 12:12, 8 November 2006

Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards


    Red crossThis is a failed proposal.
    Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use the talk page or initiate a thread at the village pump.
    This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
    Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.
    ShortcutThis page is intended to get attention quickly when dealing with personal attacks. It is not intended to serve as a form of mediation or a type of RFC. Only Personal attacks are dealt with on this page, on their own merits in accordance with Misplaced Pages's No Personal Attacks policy

    For editors who want a personal attack situation reviewed:

    1. Consider that in most cases, ignoring the attack is better than requesting sanction against the attacker. Do not report people if you are likewise guilty of hostility towards them.
    2. Make sure the user has actually commited a personal attack. (Please note that "personal attacks" are defined only under the WP:NPA policy. If a statement is not considered a personal attack under the intended spirit of this policy, it does not belong here.)
    3. The editor must have been warned earlier. The {{npa2}}, and {{npa3}} templates may be appropriate for new users; for long-term editors, it's preferable to write something rather than using a standard template. Reports of unwarned editors may be removed.
    4. If the behavior hasn't stopped, add the following header to the New Reports section of this page in the following format:
      ==={{User|NAME OF USER}}=== replacing NAME OF USER with the user name or IP address concerned, with a brief reason for listing below. Be sure to include diffs.
    5. If an editor removes the IP or username and doesn't handle the matter to your satisfaction, take it to the editor's talk page or the administrators' noticeboard, but do not re-list the user here.
    6. NB - Due to misunderstanding of these instructions and/or mis-use of this process, comments not in strict adhereance to these instructions WILL be removed. This page deals only with personal attacks under the policy WP:NPA. Reports deemed to be inappropriate for this page are liable to be moved to an appropriate venue where one exists.


    For those reported on this page:

    1. A reviewer or an administrator will review each report on this page. In dealing with the report, the contribution history of the reported user shall be checked along with the diffs provided in the report. Where no personal attack is evident, then no action will be taken - however, should an administrator see that another seperate issue is evident, appropriate action or advice for that issue may be taken/given at his or her discretion and in line with wiki policy.
    2. Reports on this page stand on their own merits in accordance with Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. As such, disputes and discussions over reports are not suitable for this page except for such comments left by admins or reviewers describing their actions and/or findings. If you notice your account reported at this page, please trust that the administrators and reviewers dealing with reports will deal with it in an even-handed and fair manner on the basis of policy alone. If you feel strongly that another "side to the story", issue, or another piece of information is missing from a report please refrain from posting here, and instead leave your comment on your talk page under the title NPA Report or another other clear and related title. The reviewing party will see this message and take it into account where applicable.

    For users handling assistance requests:

    1. For each of the users linked here, open their contributions and check for personal attacks. Also check if the users have been sufficiently warned for the current personal attack and whether they've continued to commit personal attacks after being warned.
    2. Note that there is an important difference between a user who makes many good contributions and a few personal attacks, and a user whose last edits are (nearly) all personal attacks or other conflict.
    3. Do nothing, warn them again, or, if you are an adminstrator, block the user in question as you think is required. Explain things carefully to the user who listed the attacker if you feel there's been a misunderstanding.
    4. Move the report to the Open Reports section and give an update to the status of the report.
    5. Delete old reports that have been dealt with.

    Please consider adding this page to your watchlist to make life easier for non-administrator RC-patrollers.


    New reports

    Chadbryant (talk · contribs)

    Personall attacks in edit summarys He attacks the editors not the content. DXRAW 03:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

    Forgive me, but I'm not familiar with the language, here -- is "wrestling marks" a personal attack? You may have better luck posting to WP:AN3 if this edit warring continues, though. Will leave this listed here if somebody else knows more relevant slang than I do. Luna Santin 09:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    In a nutshell he is saying that the editors can not tell between truth & fiction a "A mark is a professional wrestling fan who believes that everything associated with pro wrestling is real, rather than recognizing the existence of kayfabe (that is, it is a work)." So i believe that that comes under Negative personal comments, Accusatory comments & Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme. DXRAW 09:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

    Pete K (talk · contribs)

    Can you look at this? The temporary page documents some of the repeated instances of long term bullying the last two months by one user, PeteK, of the undersigned and others in the form of repeated personal attacks, insults, demeaning and denigrating comments. I have put them at the temporary page, as they are too many to be possible to list here.

    He has refused to agree to a Request for Mediation made on 8 Oct. regarding four articles in which he is inolved, and on 14 Oct sabotaged the Request, one day before it was accepted for Mediation, through a number of disruptive edits replacing the original list of issues to be mediated with his own list. He then deleted his own earlier list of Additional issues to be mediated after he had made hos own list into the only list of issues to be mediated, and also deleted the listing of two of the four articles listed as involved, after 9 of the 11 editors invited had accepted the invitation. His actions has led to the withdrawal of the acceptance to mediate by two of the 11 editors who had accepted the Request. in defence, he later defended his sabotage with that the Mediation Request was dead anyhow at that point. The following day, the Request was accepted by Guanaco for the Mediation team.

    He has been asked a number of times to stop his attacks and be civil, 1 Sept., 11 Sep. (leading to a follow up condescending comment on the request 15 Sept.), 6 Sept., 14 Sept., 5 Oct., another one the same day, 5 Oct., 23 Oct., 26 Oct., 29 Oct. and 31 Oct. but has after all warnings, the NPA-n, NPA-2, the NPA-3 warning and the final warning by admin Centrx - including denying the validity of the final warning by admin Centrx - continued to make personal attacks and demeaning or condescending comments on other users.

    This temporary page documents the first NPA-n, the second NPA-2, the third NPA-3 and the final warning by an admin, as also that he after all warnings and requests has continued making personal attacks on other editors up to this day.

    Maybe you can take a look at to what extent the documented behaviour of the mentioned editor is in accordance with Misplaced Pages's general long term goal and policies. Thanks, Thebee 23:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)



    Open reports

    Jaakko Sivonen (talk · contribs)

    No comments. --Ghirla 17:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    Thank you, Ghirla, for reporting yourself. That's certainly a nice action. Seriously, you and Jaakko should try a mediation, you both seem to be provoking each other - this has to stop.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Unless you provide evidence of my personal attacks against the editor in question, your edits will qualify as baiting. I don't report yourself here only because I'm immune to personal attacks from this part of the world. Ghirla 18:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Not to look far, this edit summary seems offensive to me. Such annoucements are also offensive, as has been pointed out on talk of that page. I am not saying Jaakko is behaving well; he might well be behaving worse than you - but your own actions are not perfect, either.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Piotrus, I don't know you and I don't know Ghirla, but to write 'yawn...' as an edit summary is, I feel, quite different from accusing somebody of being a racist and Finn-hater as Jaakko did. I'm also getting a bit tired of being accused of 'Swedish vandalism' by Jaakko over and over again. If anybody can find one page that I have 'vandalised', I would be interested to see it. I have reverted some of Jaakko's edits, and for that he accuses me of vandalism from time to time. He has accused a lot of people for the same thing without any justification other than disagreeing with him.JdeJ 18:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    I would not assign too much weight to Piotr's insinuations. You should not be surprised if he routinely places the articles edited by myself under the heading of "articles vandalised or in need of attention" on the Polish notice-board or reverts my edits with the summary "rvv" and the very next minute goes here to deprecate me for recognizing the editing by a as "tendentious". I want to remind that Molobo is banned for a year, despite multiple unblocks and patronizing attitude of Piotrus. Hopefully any attempts to bring up a new anti-Ghirlandajo troll, indulging in rampant incivility and revert warring as Molobo did, will be botched. --Ghirla 19:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    JdeJ, I am not defending Jaakko here, I just warned him myself. But when dealing with problematic editors, we have to respect civility and related policies ourselves - something that Ghirla seems to forget. Ghirla has the right to report people being incivil to him and to expect the community to condemn them. He has no right to be uncivil himself, and his reply above is a great proof that he does not take any criticism well.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Neither you have any right to engage in personal attacks, incivil comparisons of myself with self-professed "Finnish nationalists", or accuse me of stalking just because I post comments to the page where I am regulaly called a vandal, an idiot, or a racist (and which is understandably part of my watchlist), like you did in your latest edit. More accusations of stalking - and I will move the matter to WP:ANI --Ghirla 19:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    You have yet to present a single edit of mine in which I offended you by presenting a false claim. You on the other hand not only accuse me of incivility on talk (for example, accusing me of calling you a racist, which I never did), but you further engage in personal attacks in your recent edit summaries (, , ). Perhaps I should take this opportunity to report those edits of yours above myself at this page.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    You should provide a diff where I accused you of calling me a racist, in the first place. And please stop following me from page to page with incivil comments and accusations of stalking. Such behaviour is most alarming. Until I hear apologies, I would not talk with you on this page or any other. --Ghirla 08:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

    Recusing myself. Could someone else handle this? Durova 20:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    There was no personal attack in the 'diff' you gave. --Jaakko Sivonen 22:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    Indeed, I tend to agree that what Ghirla reported above was not a personal attack. His replies above do however contain several, IMHO. That aside, if (in an edit mentioned but not linked above) you have indeed called Ghirlandajo a 'the Finn-hater racist russophile' that is most certainly a gross violation of WP:CIV and WP:NPA and no matter what behaviour of Ghirlandajo prompted you to use such language, this is improper. If you do so again you may be blocked for incivility (just as Ghirla has been blocked in the past for similar offences).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    So calling Ghirla 'the Finn-hater racist russophile' does not qualify as a personal attack? This attitude is a new page in Piotr's anti-Ghirlandajo crusade, which he prosecutes on different noticeboards for more than a year now. It seems that his behavioural problems hit a new low. --Ghirla 08:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Piotrus' comparison of Ghirla with Jaakko here left me speachless. This habbit of following Ghirla from page to page with such offenses qualifies as Misplaced Pages:Harassment. What I don't understand is any rationale motive in this actions by Piotrus. --Irpen 23:19, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


    JBKramer (talk · contribs)

    User has been accusing me of being a sock of ((User|Z Lopez}} and 81.117.200.37 (talk · contribs). I requested the user initiate a CheckUser: which he removed, and I also warned him repeatedly on his talk page which he reverts. Request that he be instructed to stop and follow proper procedures before accusing someone of Sockpuppetry. T Gholson 16:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    T Gholson (talk · contribs) is transparently a sockpuppet of blocked 81.117.200.37 (talk · contribs). Review contribution histories. JBKramer 16:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    According to your contribution history, you can be a sock of Stirling Newberry (talk · contribs) and other various users. Please prove your point with a CheckUser. T Gholson 16:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    This doesn't seem like the sort of matter PAIN needs to look into. If the sockpuppetry is obvious, go for AN/I; if the sockpuppetry is subtle, consider RfC or checkuser. Unless somebody starts linking personal attack diffs, PAIN doesn't seem the forum for this. Luna Santin 09:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


    Fahrenheit451 (talk · contribs)

    User:Fahrenheit451 has accused me of personal attack when I ask a question, stating: Please stop the personal attacks by accusation . He has accused me of personal attacks extensively. and . Fahrenheit451 uses the term "jihad" when talking to or about me. , . User_talk:Fahrenheit451#knock_knock... tells of some of the history of our interaction. When I attempt to cool the situation off I get no where, my attempts are deleted from Fahrenheit451's page. Terryeo 09:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    User:Terryeo's "attempts" have been tantamount to trolling and are removed because they are not answered. The case Terryeo cites is when he accused me of uploading a pricelist from a magazine. In fact, I never stated the source was a magazine and there was no such evidence. Terryeo is currently on an attack probation. I have used the term "jihad" twice and not habitually like he implies in his statement above.--Fahrenheit451 09:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    If this turns out to be a content dispute with no gross personal attacks on either side I'll refer it to WP:DR. I'd like to see page diffs from Farenheit451 in support of these assertions. Durova 02:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)



    Dkkicks (talk · contribs)

    This user keeps insulting me. First off, I nominated a page for deletion, which he liked. He went crazy, I tried calmly explaining to him why I nominated it for deletion, but he didn't get it. I explained to him what cruft was and everything by linking him to WP:Cruft. He just doesnt seem to get it. He has brought up my previous bans that I have apologized many times for in the past, and says "someone who gets banned cant nominate a page for deletion" HUH?! He's just trying to dig up dirt on me so he can feel better about himself. He has called me "jackass" as well. He also vandalized my user page by putting it up for deletion just to "get even". I gave him the warnings, told him to read about wikipedia, but he wont listen. Heres some proof of what he has done. Please take your time to read, I am sick of this and just want to move on. P.S. I never want to become an admin, I'm just following the rules here.

    Types:

    - Accusatory

    - Negative

    - Profanity

    - Vandalism

    - Posting a link to an external source that fits the commonly-accepted threshold for a personal attack.

    - "Kicking them while they are down" - Regarding my previous bans.


    Read the bottom of his talk page after I told him I reported him.

    Thank you. DietLimeCola 20:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    Keeping an eye on this one. Doesn't seem quite ready for a block, yet, but they might get there. Luna Santin 00:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Oops, I had walked by and blocked this one due to the persistant attacks on one editor. If you think it would be better to unblock, please feel free. Shell 00:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Whoops. :) It's only 24 hours, anyway, which should help to calm the situation down, I hope. Luna Santin 00:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks everyone. Hopefully this block will give him time to realize that he needs to be more civil. I'll let you know if he starts to harass me some more after the block ends. DietLimeCola 02:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


    Storm Rider (talk · contribs)

    He has repeatedly insulted and attacked me. Here are but a few examples of that:

    • 04:36, November 4, 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Duke53 ("Cease and desist your pitiful, misappropriate use of warnings!")
    • "Your behavior is that of a troll. Don't put words in other editors mouths, don't project your issues on others. WIKI is not a place to work out your insecurities, but rather a place to write and produce articles of value to readers. I tire of this petty behavior. Storm Rider 06:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
    • 23:13, October 22, 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Duke53 (Quit your whining and try to grasp the meaning of policy)
    • ... "One cannot kidnap underage children whose parents and legal guardians are dead. It is a stupid statement and does not have merit" Storm Rider (talk) 06:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
    • ... "It does not matter who took care of the children, they provided needed care! I think you even see the stupidity of this position ... " "More than anything else, I pity you". Storm Rider (talk) 03:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

    There are other examples but you can get the point. The final straw was him falsely accusing me of vandalizing his user page at User talk:Jayjg :

    • My User page was vandalized by Anon 138.9.57.189. I am suspicious that User:Duke53 is the same person as the ANON that vandalized my page. Could you please check if the the IP address for both editors is the same? Your assistance would be appreciated. Thanks. Storm Rider 07:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

    I would like to see Storm Rider banned from WP for his continuing harassment and insulting, demeaning abusive behavior; As you will see I did not respond with any name calling, but rather posted WP warnings, which he does not seem to believe that he has to follow. I firmly believe that he is a serious detriment to Misplaced Pages. Thank You. Duke53 | 02:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    Page diffs on both sides, please. Durova 02:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    I don't know how to do that; most of his insults are on Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre and my talk page. Duke53 | 03:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    I think you might not know what a page diff is; please see here. Storm Rider 05:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    Here you go, hope this is what you meant:

    I've left a civility warning at Storm Rider's talk page. Will review any page diffs that Storm Rider provides. The request for a checkuser would have to be made elsewhere. Durova 07:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    Durova, I have been an editor for quite some time; this is the first time in my memory that I have been given a warning, particularly when dealing with editors that have demonstrated in their short history little ability to work cooperatively. I am disappointed in your warning because it only encourages the unwanted behavior on WIKI of Duke53. In addition, instead of promoting a cooperative environment, you force others to post warnings and seek mediation for every action by Duke53 that could conceivably be interpreted as breaking WIKI policies. I am game for it, but you make WIKI out to be a place not for cooperative, intelligent editing, but a place for people with an axe to grind and how many warnings can I issue in every time someone disagrees with my POV. This was not a positive decision. Storm Rider 17:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    If you choose to provide diffs I'll review them and act accordingly. I don't have checkuser privileges - I don't think anyone at this particular noticeboard does - and due to the sensitive nature of those requests they have to be made formally in a specified manner. The warning, however, stands. Given your history as a productive and generally unproblematic editor I trust you'll take it to heart and correct the behavior that caused it: if another editor really is disruptive then the simplest way to address the situation is to walk the straight and narrow while cooperating with administrators and dispute resolution. Respectfully, Durova 21:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    Marky48 (talk · contribs)

    This user has insulted me, threatened me and accused me for several times. I have put up with his insults in the hope of reaching a compromise on the disputed matter but unfortunately he doesnt respect anything that is against his POV. He also has a history of incivility and has been warned several times.

    • "From looks of it and the partisan tinkering up until this point this move will be a fight." 15:16, 27 October 2006
    • "Well Kirill I agree but who will stop the Iranians here from keeping the thing in the lead as the Great Explainer?", "For them it's a tag team. Purely partisan and POV." 25 October 2006
    • "Say goodnight Dick", "Sign or get the hell out", "Touch the article again and you'll be gone permanantly from Misplaced Pages" 05:20, 6 November 2006

    (Marmoulak 20:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC))

    Case has been taken to arbitration. Blocked Marky48 for 12 hours - threatening in attempt to force Mamoulak into mediation is very worrying, but want to make sure he can participate in Arb case. Shell 00:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Note: Marky48 threatened me via email after being blocked. No additional sanctions were imposed. Shell 03:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    Please follow up with the administrators at arbitration. It's better if this gets handled in one place. Respectfully, Durova 20:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


    Just some comments about Sugaar and Thulean. Thulean and others are trying to hijack the white people's page with Nordicist/Neo-Nazi contributions all the time. One does not have to be Einstein to see that. I call things by their name and I find this issue very serious. Sugaar is also in the same battle against Neo-Nazi POV pushing. Veritas et Severitas 23:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    If that's the case then associated matters which aren't in arbitration should be posted to WP:RFI. This board can only deal with personal attacks and it wouldn't be appropriate for me to step on ArbCom's toes regarding a case in progress. This allegation is very serious and should be treated as such, so I hope involved editors make this easy to administrate by following recommendations. Respectfully, Durova 02:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    Categories: