Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Neotarf (talk | contribs) at 01:54, 6 February 2013 (→MOS and ArbCom: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sandstein's misunderstanding of the AE issues and consequent bogus warning

In case you're still watching; this is directly relevant to why you're resigning.

You'll probably want to read and weigh in on User talk:SMcCandlish#Arbitration enforcement warning: Manual of Style and article titles policy, especially the second round, after Sandstein made it clear that he did not even know about the AN filing that led up to the AE request, and is thus missing almost all of the facts, background, context and history. The "you can now be blocked without further notice by anyone with a hare up their butt" warning we received was unfounded, unjust and invalid, and I'm not going to stand for being treated like a wikicriminal this way. I've devoted unbelievable amounts of time and effort to this project and I'll be damned if I'll be lynched for it. Note that User:Noetica indicated, before this pointless boot dropped, some willingness to resign editing over the matter as well. — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖכþ Contrib. 12:55, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you SMcCandlish. I am currently on the road, taking a much needed vacation (I write this from a train), and have just extracted myself from a cyclone and a flood. I don't relish the idea of interrupting my travels to spend several days in some hotel room looking up policies and diffs, but eventually I plan to make some comment.

In the meantime, here is a thought. Last week I was the laughingstock of Facebook when I posted an "I edit Misplaced Pages" banner. The various academics and linguists there will not touch WP with a ten foot pole. One comment in particular stands out: "Misplaced Pages is ruled by the Last Man Standing."

Who is left standing at this point? We have Apteva, who has been given every consideration, every explanation possible. Repeated patient discussions on the talk page. A lengthy RFCU. Then ANI, AN, and AE, complete with all proper notifications and step by step instructions for appeals. An endless supply of second chances. In two weeks Apteva latest ban will expire. Does anyone doubt he will be back?

At the same time we have four editors who are effectively banned from WP by the actions of one admin, and their reputations besmirched, without diffs, without notifications, without discussion, without consensus. While I am a relatively new editor, with barely a thousand edits, some of the others are long time regulars who have devoted much time to the Manual of Style. WP has been lucky to have attracted such caliber of professional talent; I am certainly in good company.

It has been an interesting year, and I thank those who have taught me so much.

—Neotarf (talk) 02:01, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

MOS and ArbCom

I have placed the following message on the talk page of User:Bishonen:

I welcome your offer to post a request for arbitration as a neutral editor in the recent AE matter.

I see several advantages to this.

1) New eyes. Long-time participants may able to express the issues more succinctly to someone who has not already formed an opinion on an issue. Indeed, this is the much of the real work of an ArbCom case, providing a forum for the exchange of ideas between parties that is necessary to any resolution.

2) It is simply too dangerous for any involved editor to do so.

—Neotarf (talk) 01:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)