Misplaced Pages

talk:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-03-18/WikiProject report - 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 talk:Misplaced Pages Signpost

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Folantin (talk | contribs) at 18:09, 22 March 2013 (QED). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:09, 22 March 2013 by Folantin (talk | contribs) (QED)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

← Back to WikiProject report

Discuss this story

The RfC linked to above, called for by members of WikiProject Composers, concluded that:

WikiProjects are free to publish guidelines and recommendations but do not have the authority to override a local consensus on the talk page of an article.

Infoboxes are not to be added nor removed systematically from articles. Such actions would be considered disruptive.

Yet members of the project, including some interviewed above, persist in removing infoboxes from articles about composers on sight, and without debate, giving WP:COMPOSERS as a justification. We thus have a small number of editors, operating as a team, to override wider community consensus. Their response to this being pointed out often comprises ad hominem attacks; and article talk page debates are often the subject of their partisan canvassing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

We also have a small number of editors, operating as a team, who persist on adding infoboxes to articles on sight, and without debate, overriding wider consensus. They (or, rather, one of them in particular) exhibit a lack of courtesy and communication skill in debates. What's your point? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, there's an infobox tag-team of about half a dozen users who think they represent the "community". Mabbett's a notorious troll. He's been banned twice, each time for a year, by ArbCom. Ironically, I've been told it was only the limitations of the computer software which meant that his second ban wasn't permanent. Now we have to put up with his obnoxious POV-pushing again and again all over Misplaced Pages. --Folantin (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

QED. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. 1 one-year Arbcom ban + 1 one-year Arbcom ban = troll. QED. --Folantin (talk) 18:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)