Misplaced Pages

User talk:Altenmann/ar1

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.
< User talk:Altenmann

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hux (talk | contribs) at 20:57, 17 February 2008 (→Accusations of Wikilawyering: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 20:57, 17 February 2008 by Hux (talk | contribs) (→Accusations of Wikilawyering: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
“ I believe that any study which would question and deconstruct rather than defend, excuse or accuse various institutions is worth the effort. ”
— Irina Livezeanu

Taking a break until wikilawyers move onto other victims. Have fun with cangaroo courts. `'Míkka>t 19:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Accusations of Wikilawyering

Following on from the Wikiquette alert I opened up in response to your various posts to me, it has become obvious that you're using this term - Wikilawyering - in a way that suggests you don't really understand what it means. As you can see from that link, Wikilawyering is essentially any of the following:

  1. Using formal legal terms in an inappropriate way when discussing Misplaced Pages policy;
  2. Abiding by the letter of a policy or guideline while violating its spirit;
  3. Asserting that the technical interpretation of Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines should override the principles they express; and
  4. Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions.

If you read my posts with the above in mind, you'll see that in fact I've done none of these things. As far as I can tell, when you accuse an editor of Wikilawyering all you're really saying is that the editor has cited a policy page in order to support their argument. That clearly isn't what Wikilawyering is. Perhaps you disagree, but if you do then I think it's fair to point out that you yourself have done exactly the same thing.

I don't know if this misunderstanding of Wikilawyering is the reason why you've been so rude towards me and other editors, but if it is then hopefully this post goes at least some way towards preventing a continuation of that in the future. Discouraging people from editing articles by being rude to them is bad enough, but if it's based on a misunderstanding then it's even worse. -- Hux (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)