Misplaced Pages

:Administrators' noticeboard/Personal attacks - 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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ghirlandajo (talk | contribs) at 19:37, 7 November 2006 (→{{User|Jaakko Sivonen}}: please no more incivility, Piotrus). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:37, 7 November 2006 by Ghirlandajo (talk | contribs) (→{{User|Jaakko Sivonen}}: please no more incivility, Piotrus)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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    This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.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

    Sugaar (talk · contribs)

    From the first time I edited, this user accused me of being Nazi:

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

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

    "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."

    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."

    Thulean 19:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


    Mrpainkiller7 (talk · contribs)

    User page "enemies" section is self-explanatory. Should take note that the user has shown willingness to compromise from this earlier version which included both my Wiki name and another, after two revert and two warnings. Has also vandalised my talk page as a form of "payback".

    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 Molobo-style troll (whose edits consist of reverting only and whose behaviour was explicitly equaled to Molobo's by an arbitrator) 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)

    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)

    81.223.23.159 (talk · contribs)

    This is an IP that has been warned about NPA and is now engaging in persistent attacks on another editor that involve personally-directed hate language and explicit threats of serious violence. Please look at this and this, and it should be clear what needs to be done. Thanks. Dasondas 16:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    UPDATE I notice that the effected editor (Durova) has now given this IP a one-month block. I have no part in this, and indeed my only previous interaction with Durova was yesterday on an unrelated matter, however it is my opinion that the entire community would be better off if the individual who made the above attacks was permanently banned. Perhaps the hate-language itself might not warrant permanent expulsion (although, I'm not sure it doesn't), but explicit threats of physical violence in the context of writing an encyclopedia are beyond the pale and shouldn't be treated with anything but the harshest of responses. Dasondas 16:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    88.110.146.3 (talk · contribs)

    I copied from one of the help pages as it was recommended it be posted here. I will apply the warning template to the anontalk page. I am wondering what the best way to handle the following edits made to my user page. I am really not that worried about the actual threat made against me, but it is un-nerving. I am unsure of what caused this reaction from this anon.

    The first edit, , <!--I'm coming to kill you! =D--> was changed three minutes later to <!--I'm coming to eat you! =D-->.

    In investigating, I have found that the first type of message was also left on User:Lol's page, .

    --Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 12:30, 7 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)

    Open reports

    Lordkazan (talk · contribs)

    Repeat offender continues personal attacks and incivil behaviour. "Until you learn to stop being dishonest you should leave wikipedia - immediately. You are yet again mischaracterizing the content of the citations in a, at this point clearly intentionally, dishonest attempt to make that assertion. Assume Good Faith no longer applies since you clearly have demonstrated that you are not acting in good faith by clear and intentional dishonesty about the content of peer reviewed scientific studies. Until such a time as you can conduct yourself in an honest manner on wikipedia you should removed yourself from editing."

    User has had numerous warnings (see Talk and archived pages), some blocks, and an RfC due to his conduct. Jakew 20:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    Updated: User deleted warning for the first time he posted the current attack. Jakew 20:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    I came here to make a complaint for the very same offense and saw that JakeW got here first. I would like to add my strong endorsement to JakeW's call for action and reiterate that the offender here is a long-time repeat offender (a serial attacker, if you will) who has lashed out against several different editors on many occasions, and has been doing so continuously since at least the time I began editing Misplaced Pages several months ago (and, I imagine, he's been at it quite a bit longer). The post in question here is the first he has made to the Circumcision discussion in over a week, and he chose to lead with yet another attack. He was last blocked for violating WP:NPA on October 24. Dasondas 20:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    Blocked 1 week. Follow up if the problem resumes. Durova 02:27, 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)
    "Comment Will you grow up? This is cruft, plain and simple. And if you move it to the main Arthur page, it'll still be cruft. Stop going crazy because an article that you like is nominated for AFD, and everyone is voting to delete it. DietLimeCola 07:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)"
    Your just as bad as him. MatthewFenton (talk · contribs · count · email) 09:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

    Mofomojo (talk · contribs)

    Mofomojo has been warned numerous times (five that I can see) on his/her talk page about personal attacks, and yet persisted in firing this personal attack missive at Radiant! and this identical one at Cyrius. --Takeel 20:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

    Ehhh... it seems questionable, but the guy hasn't even edited today, if I'm reading the contribs right. Doesn't seem like a pressing problem. Luna Santin 00:17, 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)
    Categories: