Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AioftheStorm (talk | contribs) at 21:13, 30 August 2014 (→Talkpage redaction). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives and sandboxes My articles Awards received Dreadstar's Archives Dreadstar's Sandboxes Defender The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar In recognition & thanks for your efforts in helping us work our way towards consensus towards making Battle of Washita River a good WP:NPOV (instead of WP:SOAP) article. Still a lotta work to do, but now we can do it, in no small part because of your help. Yksin Award! The Vandal Eliminator Award * I, Stormtracker94, award you the Vandal Eliminator Award for amazing vandal fighting and RC Patrol. STORMTRACKER 94 RL Barnstar The Real Life Barnstar - For reporting a situation that could have resulted in a real life massacre I present you this barnstar. Initiative in dealing with situations like this is essential, and for all we know you may have saved lives the moment you posted that. Good work! Thank you. +Hexagon1 Initiative in dealing with situations like this is essential, and for all we know you may have saved lives the moment you posted that. Good work! +Hexagon1 Just be glad you're on the good side, every time I get involved in situations like that, I seem to be the one getting arrested... (kidding, please don't report me Mr. Thoughtpolice-man! :) +Hexagon1 Holy wow. Good job, Dreadstar. --Fang Aili

New comments below this section

Thanks! Dreadstar †

Talkpage redaction

We have very strict guidelines for what material in other editor's comments is allowed to be removed, and redacting a sentence within another editor's post because you believe it's a violation of WP:NOTFORUM is in clear violation of those guidelines. Also per Help:Minor edit: "Checking the minor edit box signifies that the current and previous versions differ only superficially (typographical corrections, etc.), in a way that no editor would be expected to regard as disputable.", reverting another user multiple times over an issue like this is clearly a misuse of the minor edit tag.AioftheStorm (talk) 03:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I think calling the 'attacks' as being made by misogynists to be an unsourced attack, but I'll retract that and allow others to make that determination. Dreadstar ☥ 03:14, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your retraction. I would agree with you if the misogynist comments were directed at a person, but since they're directed to an unspecified body of people I don't think removal is allowable under WP:TPO. I will accept other editor's opinions though. Again thank you for self reverting.AioftheStorm (talk) 03:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but directing an attack against an "unspecified body of people" is indeed an attack and violates our civility and NPA polices; I also submit that the comment was directed at a very specific 'body of people', which is anyone attacking said subject. I'd recommend removing that inflammatory comment, but I'll leave it consensus for now. Dreadstar ☥ 03:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that the relevant guidelines just don't read like that. WP:NPA very specifically discusses personal attacks against editors, and redirects discussions of personal attacks to non-editors to WP:BLP:

• For policies related to attacks against living persons in general, whether or not they edit Misplaced Pages, see Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons.

WP:BLPGROUP discusses the application of BLP rules to groups and considers them to be complex and to be handled on a case-by-case basis, with small groups being more likely to be applicable to BLP. In this particular case the group being discussed is far too large and impersonal for BLP to apply. AioftheStorm (talk) 23:02, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

And in this particular case, I believe it to be an attack on those who have specifically criticized the subject; which means there is no "too large and impersonal" group being referred to, her boyfriend for example. Dreadstar ☥ 02:16, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:BLP was created to curb libel and prevent harming people. WP:BLPGROUP was an extension of BLP designed to allow smaller groups, such as a rockband or the WBC, the same protections because they could be similarly harmed as a living person. A caveat was left in BLPGROUP to allow for larger groups on a case-by-case basis, but that was never meant to apply to large groups of tens of thousands of people with no official association. I can appreciate that you're trying to maintain civility, but your stretching BLPGROUP far beyond what it is for.

As far as civility goes I would agree with you that the comment does violate WP:Civility, but a subsection of that policy,WP:REMOVEUNCIVIL, specifically forbids removal of other editor's comments on the basis of civility unless their comments constitute obvious acts of trolling/vandalism/attacks against another editor/outing.AioftheStorm (talk) 23:02, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Yet another distortion of policy, starting where it says " It is not normally appropriate"; the comments under discussion here are not normal. Further, I say such commentary and the restoration of such are trolling. I'm sorry to see you defending such broad and insulting comments - as a matter of fact, I do not believe at this point that you even understand how broad these statements are. Criticism by any and all reliable and honest sources are blackened by this over-broad generalization, falsely making them all misogynists; including her ex-boyfriend, all the commentors on 4chan, geekparty, and even the dailydot - anyone who criticizes her is slimed as a woman hater. Which is clearly not true and you diminish the truthful accusations against those who actually are women haters. Sad day. Dreadstar ☥ 02:16, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what distortion of policy you are referring to, or what the quotation " It is not normally appropriate" is supposed to be quoting. I will state that this post does not constitute on "obvious act of trolling" and that to characterize Robo's comments as such is unfair. The fact that other editors disagree that it is not trolling should be enough to demonstrate that it isn't an obvious act of trolling. I also don't think you understand what I am defending here, it is not the comments themselves, but the ability to make such comments, and its the fact that they are so broad that policies like BLPGROUP do not apply to them. I do think it unfair to characterize criticism of Zoe Quinn as being misogynistic, but editing other's comments when they're being sincere is an extremely rude and should only be done when some person or group is endangered by such comments which I've already explained I do not believe is the case. This conversation has gone on longer than this topics warrants though, and I plan to just let it die. If you respond to me, and your comment appears to require a reply then I will respond back, but otherwise I'll be moving on. I do appreciate your concerns and efforts to keep the talkpage fair, but I disagree with what that meant in this case. Either ways happy editing to you and Robo both.AioftheStorm (talk) 21:13, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

As the one who made the original comment Dreadstar objected to, I was invited to comment here. I'll repeat what I just said on my own talk page, which is that I was referring to the attacks and harassment against Quinn as misogynist rather than the people behind them (who may or may not be). I was not suggesting that all the criticism of her was motivated by misogyny; only that some of it appears misogynist, which I think is uncontestable. I accept my original comment was provocative and perhaps a little uncivil, but I don't accept that violated BLP, NPA or any other core Misplaced Pages policy. I won't apologise for calling out misogyny where I see it, and if my comment was a bit hotheaded it's because I was furious with how this woman has been treated, and how our article on her appeared to be playing that down. I no longer have any issue with the article, and I hope this can be an end to the matter. Robofish (talk) 12:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the response Robofish, while I do not wish to get involved in the article's content, I do want to stop the unwarranted and unsourced attacks on the subject of that article. In order to do that, I need to remain neutral and address unsourced attacks by either side and that's what I was attempting to do in this case. Not all of the attackers are verified by WP:RS to be misogynists, so that was my concern - if it had been a clear violation of BLP, I would have blocked all of you; as it is, it's vague enough to be just to be an annoyance in the attempt to keep the talk page of that article in check. You make an admin's job that much harder by making uncivil and inflammatory comments. Dreadstar ☥ 16:35, 30 August 2014 (UTC)