This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Keithbob (talk | contribs) at 21:43, 27 April 2013 (→Yet another personal attack today: ce). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:43, 27 April 2013 by Keithbob (talk | contribs) (→Yet another personal attack today: ce)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | This user is a participant in WikiProject Law. |
| File:WRCBarnstar.png | The Wikipedian Red Cross Barnstar | |
| For continuously rescuing the Ref list and summarizing Ref codes on the TM and related articles. Good work!} — Kbob • Talk • 20:38, 25 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
The Surreal Barnstar | |
| A little chaos can often show a mirror to the truth. But I have no idea how you have managed to stay with "that" article for so long. The thing makes me feel tired just thinking about it |
|
The Citation Barnstar |
| Not the intended use of this star, but I thank you for educating me about reference sources and making me a better editor as a result. Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC) |
Page achiving
Hey Fladrif. It would be much easier to follow things if you left content a little longer on your talk page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 13:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Blocking
You have been blocked for 72 hours for making uncivil comments as per here evidence provided here . When you return to editing please interact more professionally and concentrate on content rather than contributors. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Several editors at the ANI have commented that you are not an appropriate person to adjudicate on this because of your past involvement with him. Anyway personally I think that Fladrifs behaviour is so gross over a period of years that only an indefinite ban suffices, a 72 hour ban just trivializes things. He has been blocked several times before already. --Penbat (talk) 19:37, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- While feel free to put together a RfC User or request a indefinite ban at ANI. I still consider it inappropriate for a single admin to indefinitely ban a long time editor while providing zero evidence as justification. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- What? Ched has posted twice today at AN/I saying he/she is working on a comprehensive report and several other editors including myself have provided dozens of diffs showing chronic problematic editing. What you should be doing Doc James is undoing your reversal of the indef block by Ched and waiting for the community to complete its evaluation. Instead you are supporting and perpetuating the chronic disruptive behavior of an editor with whom you have a long term connection. That is very troubling. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- You seem to be blind to the fact that the ANI is now getting very long, around 10 editors have made critical comments about Fladrif and hardly anybody supporting him. Most people would call that a consensus. Anyway it isnt fair that you who controversially did the unblock adjudicate on this ANI.--Penbat (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- While feel free to put together a RfC User or request a indefinite ban at ANI. I still consider it inappropriate for a single admin to indefinitely ban a long time editor while providing zero evidence as justification. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Yet another personal attack today
Fladrif, this comment, you made today, after being blocked by Ched and unblocked by Doc James,
is a blatant personal attack. An attack you made without provocation, in the middle of civil discussion on content, and part of a long series of abusive comments you have directed towards User:TimidGuy over the past few years. You have been repeatedly warned by me and numerous others that this kind of behavior is unacceptable and yet you continue again and again.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- You call this a personal attack? "This has been a persistent pattern with TimidGuy, blatantly misrepresenting sources on TM research when he can't get away with excluding them. MastCell is 110% correct - Misplaced Pages does not cherry pick out of context statements from the body of a WP:MEDRS compliant source to contradict the author's summary conclusions. TimidGuy has been repeatedly sanctioned for this kind of conduct following the TM ArbCom. Continuing to argue for such misrepresentation of sources is clearly sanctionable and needs to stop, now. It hardly improves things to have EMP and Spairig (resurrected from the dead, it would seem) forming a Greek chorus to urge him on. " Which part exactly? Maybe Fladrif could provide difs to support each bit. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:52, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Frankly DocJames it looks like we may have to start an ANI on you as well. You should step away from this dispute with Fladrif as you have had various involvements with him in the past. --Penbat (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have just started that ANI Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Questionable involvement by DocJames on Fladrif dispute--Penbat (talk) 20:26, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- The diff is from yesterday, before the block by Ched. NE Ent 21:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks NE Ent, my mistake, I've stricken that part of my statement. Cheers. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- You call this a personal attack? "This has been a persistent pattern with TimidGuy, blatantly misrepresenting sources on TM research when he can't get away with excluding them. MastCell is 110% correct - Misplaced Pages does not cherry pick out of context statements from the body of a WP:MEDRS compliant source to contradict the author's summary conclusions. TimidGuy has been repeatedly sanctioned for this kind of conduct following the TM ArbCom. Continuing to argue for such misrepresentation of sources is clearly sanctionable and needs to stop, now. It hardly improves things to have EMP and Spairig (resurrected from the dead, it would seem) forming a Greek chorus to urge him on. " Which part exactly? Maybe Fladrif could provide difs to support each bit. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:52, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Doc James, you are an admin, but if you don't know the basic policies I'll list them here for you:
- WP:TALK says: "Talk pages are for improving the encyclopedia, not for expressing personal opinions on a subject or an editor."
- WP:NPA says a personal attack includes: "Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki."
This is chronic disruptive behavior from Fladrif not only across the board on WP but also specifically in regards to User:TimidGuy (there are more TG related diffs but I don't have time to collect them today). In the meantime your continued efforts to undermine the authority of another Admin (Ched), circumvent community process (ANI) and defend the misbehavior of a chronically disruptive editor is deeply troubling. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)