Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Midgley (talk | contribs) at 22:42, 17 May 2006 (→{{User|Pansophia}}: as an epiphenomenom.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This 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This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.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.

Guettarda (talk · contribs), Bhouston (talk · contribs), CSTAR (talk · contribs), User-multi error: "csloat" is not a valid project or language code (help).,

On Talk:Juan Cole, several editors have endorsed a statement which constituted a serious personal attacks against three users. Two of the endorsers withdrew their endorsement to part, but not all, of this statement, after its nature as a personal attack was pointed out to them. The other editors did not. Their endorsement of this statement is in itself a personal attack:

Endorsers:

1. Guettarda
2. Ben Houston
3. CSTAR 16:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
4. csloat 16:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
5. KillerChihuahua 16:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC) modified to clarify first para only endorsed. KillerChihuahua 23:10, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
6. bcasterline t 16:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC) I'm also more interested in the first paragraph. bcasterline t 23:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
7. •Jim62sch• 00:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

• The endorsement of this statement by csloat is ironic because he had been guilty of not following Misplaced Pages guidelines WP:AGF and WP:NPA himself in the editing of this particular page (abstracted in ). Similarly, another endorser, Guettarda, soon after endorsing this statement made direct personal attacks against Elizmr (abstracted in ), and Ben Houston had made attacks against Elizmr on the talk page of another article which were felt by the consensus of editors there not to have any basis (abstracted in ).

• User:CSTAR’s endorsement of the statement of Elizmr’s unfairness is especially ironic, because he and User:Elizmr had been engaging in civil and seemingly productive interchanges (abstracted in ).

• User:CSTAR’s endorsement of the statement singling out User:Isarig’s particular violations of policies are also ironic. Cstar had taken administrative action against Isarig in what Isaring had stated was an unbalanced way, and CSTAR not answered Isarig’s notes concerning this (abstracted in).

• To be fair, personal attacks and assumptions of poor faith by User:Elizmr, User:Armon, and User:Isarig are collected here , as are those of User:LeeHunter (abstracted in) an editor on the page not characterized as obstructing progress on the page by the endorsers of the above statement, and sharing a POV with the signers of the above statement. Elizmr 01:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Pansophia (talk · contribs)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kaiser_Permanente&curid=477362&diff=53254033&oldid=53253341 etcetera. 3 warnings. Set a bad example I think. Midgley 03:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The problem is actually Midgley. See this complaint. Also see my talk page - someone already looked into this. --Pansophia 03:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually that reference is an RFC on someone else. Nobody has "looked into this" although others have commented to various effects. Pansophia is currently blocked for violating 3RR, but that is separate from this except to the extent that a recurring pattern of baheviour affecting me and others is for that user to substitute attacks on other editors for discussion. I suspect the user was lead astray by the troll to which that RFC relates. Midgley 13:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The example cited by Midgley is not a personal attack, but a statement of fact. Midgley should rather provide specific examples than write "etcetera" if he thinks this is a problem. --Leifern 10:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

THe example quoted has nothing whatsoever to do with Kaiser Permanente, the subject of the page. Therefore whatever it is is not part of writing an encyclopaedia. It was an attack, it was an ad hominem attack rather than an argument on content, and it is a habit Leifern has also adopted. Leifern and Pansophia have an association in this. The etcetera above are a string of similar attacks in Pansophia's contributions - listing them in this page would be tedious, unusual, and more appropriate for an RFC which may well occur. Midgley 16:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

How does removing a cleanup tag constitute a personal attack? I'm confused. ---J.S (t|c) 20:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, just saw the edit summery: (Midgley is tag-warring to set me up for 3RR. See this page for the Midgley issue: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/86.10.231.219#Description). That seems more like incivil behavior then an actual personal attack. ---J.S (t|c) 20:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

There has been a rather persistent pattern of behaviour. I'm not the first person to receive attacks in response to a difference in opinion from Pansophia, who has an adverse interest in Kaiser Permanente, and has made many non-encyclopaedic edits on that article Kaiser Permanente - see talk page - in order to pursue it. Getting advice and making common cause with User:86.10.231.219 a troll, and being persuaded by User:Ombudsman's quirky welcome to new users was probably a bad influence on yclept user. Both, for reasons not unconnected, are subjects of RFCs and an arbcom case at present. Midgley 22:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Philwelch (talk · contribs)

• User:Philwelch called me a tempermental child.

Signed: Travb 13:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, he said you were acting like a temperamental child. Whether or not the characterization was accurate, that is a small but significant difference. I do not see a personal attack here, at least not one egrecious enough to warrant intervention.

In any case, other aspects of this dispute are already being discussed elsewhere, and I see no reason to start a redundant discussion here. I'd suggest both of you try not to step on each other's toes for a while, and try to remember that in online communication it's quite easy to misinterpret another person's remarks. The way to keep such misunderstandings from escalating into pointless flamewars is to assume good faith, even when it seems hard to do so, and to generally try to maintain a thick skin and a calm attitude. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Lutherian (talk · contribs)

IP address: 85.0.202.5 He has been warned numerous times. Here he insults user Moby Dick: , I also consider calling me a racist a personal attack as well. See: (called user Fadix "disgusting" for example) or --Eupator 19:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Also an attack on THOTH (talk • contribs) : here and again attacks Eupator (talk • contribs) : here. Eupator's edit summary (sockpuppet of Lutherian) was, in fact, admitted by Lutherian (talk • contribs) here. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Not sure how this is a personal attack. This is in fact not a personal attack... it's just very incivility.

Also, when someone sais "rv sorry not a sock puppet, just forgot to sign in" it is obvious that they were not trying to hide there identity. Your forgetting WP:AGF and committing a borderline Personal attack yourself. In any case... it looks like both "sides" are at fault in this incident. ---J.S (t|c) 20:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Eupator (talk · contribs)

This user has frequently been making condescending, insluting and racist remarks and falsly accuses me of sockpuppetting when in fact I simply forgot to sign in! A prime example is the following that he posted onto my talk page : "I'm not sure if English is your first language or whether you have cognitive issues but the meer suggestion that a new user such as yourself that jumps into controversial topics might perhaps be a sockpuppet is not only not a personal attack but a daily occurance on wikipedia. Fear not, this is not turkey or mongolia. You are innocent until proven otherwise.--Eupator 15:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)" and another personal attack posted today on the talk page of Armenian Legion: "That bullcrap was merely copy pasted from already discredited propaganda websites. The scoundrel didn't even bother to paraphrase that baloney.--Eupator 17:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)" and another "So Lucifer, you mean to tell me that in this freedom of speech paradise anyone can go and burn the turkish flag in ankara like we can do here in the US with our flag? Can the average Joe deface an image of your God ataturk like we can do in Europe or the States with our leaders images and whatnot? Go feed your crap to someone else troll and enough of this irrelevant spamming. This is not a discussion forum.--Eupator 18:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)"

Furthermore I did not insult anyone by the name of Moby Dick. Calling moby prick someone who calls himself moby penis is hardly insulting! Lutherian 19:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Note what Lutherian said here: "This is a true testament to the racist nature of the Armenian psyche! Weems was not mistaken to call them a nation of terrorists!". —Khoikhoi 20:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Pantherarosa (talk · contribs)

This user has recently made several personal attacks at the Mohammed Mossadegh talk page . He has called editors for "ignorami and wannabes" and assumes they "have very limited education and whose mental capacity simply does not suffice for putting well researched data into context for an encyclopedia". I have given him a warning but this is not the first time he has been warned about personal attacks . He just simply deletes and ignores them. --- Melca 09:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages failed proposals
• Inactive project pages