Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ed g2s (talk | contribs) at 11:52, 27 May 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared.

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This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.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

Dzoni (talk · contribs)

I have never been so blatendly insulted on this Misplaced Pages as by this user that does not seam to have a shred of self control . His message, although in Serbian, starts with "suck my dick". Immidiate block requested. --Dado 04:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

Warned twice, but shows no signs of stopping. --InShaneee 23:21, 18 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)

Warned, but shows no willingness to let up. --InShaneee 23:20, 18 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)

Funny that you should "uncover" unhelpful and useless deleteted content (some even by banned VANDALS such as LIGerasimova), while yourself anabashdly deleting editors precious work, without foundation (e. g. on your talkpage). You should apply the same zeal in contributing intellectually to WIKIPEDIA as shown when naming serious editors on this PERSONAL ATTACK page Pantherarosa 23:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how commenting on other users' actions is a defense for your transgressions. Paul Cyr 23:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

When I was investigating this situation I discovered that Patherarosa was removing warnings from their talk page under the notion that (s)he was entitled to do so. I informed Patherarosa of the policies (s)he was breaking and added the {{Wr}} tag to their talk page. After I did this (s)he became upset that I was not minding my own business and called me a juvinile zealot. Paul Cyr 23:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Unhelpful and useless content? What do you call this edit by you then ? What i am referring to above are previously deleted warnings. --- Melca 23:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• • • • It is hardly your business to judge my position, taken in June of 2005! It is You and the schoolboy trolling me , who engage in personal ATTACKS on my person! Instead, contribute to WIKIPEDIA intellectually!Pantherarosa 00:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you take a look at WP:EXPLAIN. You mind pointing out our personal attacks against you? If I made any against you I would definately want to apologize. Please provide a link so I can see where I attacked you. Paul Cyr 00:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

After receiving several warnings , this user has made yet another personal attack at my talk page . --- Melca 08:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Given several warnings (all archived now), if he continues, he should be blocked. --InShaneee 23:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but after a user receives multiple warnings, are they not supposed to be blocked on the next infraction? We know the user has been warned; we are asking for intervention because he has responded to every warning with a personal attack. Paul Cyr 01:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Administrators are given leeway here, and blocking is only used if it appears the user is unwilling to cooperate following several warnings. Attempts must be made to reform the user before that. --InShaneee 03:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Many , many , many , many , many , many , warnings and attempts were made. Seems to me like the user did not want to coopertate. Notice how there has not been a single time they've not responded to a warning with a personal attack? Paul Cyr 06:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Considering the incivil tone of your 'warnings', I'm willing to give him some leeway here. --InShaneee 15:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

That's hilarious. Not only is that a double standard and makes me thing you have no understanding of the situation, but the warnings were templates from Misplaced Pages:Template messages. So a user can attack multiple people, the user gets warned, attacks more people, but if those people respond in the slightest incivil manner, the user gets off scott free. Paul Cyr 18:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Laugh all you want, but you're not going to find an administrator anywhere who's going to block someone who hasn't made any incivil comments, much less edited at all, since their last warning. --InShaneee 03:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I was laughing at your practising a double standard and the fact that I don't think you even know anything about the situation. Case in point: Timestamp for {{Npa3}} (a.k.a. final warning tag) was May 17, 18:17 ; Pantherarosa's last personal attack time stamp was May 17, 19:27 . So after Pantherarosa received the final warning tag, (s)he made two more personal attacks. Therefore your statement is null; Pantherarosa made more attacks after receiving the final warning tag. Paul Cyr 03:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not the only admin that watches this page; no one else has felt the need to take action against this user, either. --InShaneee 03:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, given that I am the primary person doing maintainance on this page, and that I pretty much proved this page is neglected over at WP:AN, you probably are the only admin watching. In any case, stop avoiding points. You seem to make a claim, which I rebut, only to move onto another. I'm still waiting for a response to my reply above. Or are you just going to ignore it as you have done to my discussions with you before? In short: stop changing the subject. Paul Cyr 03:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The simple fact is that in the end, it all comes down to a judgement call based on circumstances. If this user comes back and makes any incivil comments, he'll get blocked, period. When I came to the situation, what I saw was you actively being abusive, so I had to act on that as it happened, as any other admin would. --InShaneee 04:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

And I've already shown how I only made one incivil edit. Please don't use words with a stronger negative position than appropriate. As well, Melca made no abusive edits, but Patherarosa still attacked him. Given your "cherry-picking", refusal to provide any explaination by resorting to "it is because I say it is" type responses and after looking at your talk page seeing your being unwilling to provide a reasonable explaination for users in dispute with you, I feel that you have abused your admin powers and made bad-faith towards resolving disputes. Therefore I have brought the matter to AN/I. The discussion there has already started with two users posting complaints about you, so hopefully it can be resolved as I hope it can. I don't think you can honestly say to yourself that you have put in a reasonable effort to resolve the situation properly, so if the discussion at AN/I results in no reasonable solution, I (and I imagine with strong support from at least a few other users) will be taking the matter to the ArbCom. Consider this my last response here. Unless you wish to discuss Pantherarosa's conduct, I will ignore any replys from you here. Paul Cyr 04:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Finally. --InShaneee 04:22, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

TürkİntikamTugayı (talk · contribs)

No warnings given as account is clearly a throwaway sock. This edit (tagged as minor) is an implicit threat of violence (actually, for all I know, it's explicit). Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• Username translates to "Turkish Revenge Brigade" which may constitute to a {{Usernameblock}} --Cat out 13:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

User downwards

he said, "Keep it up and I shall personally report you to the admins who blocked you. You are banned for a reason. Walk away from the computer and pour yourself a cold drink. Cheers.--Downwards 22:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

67.101.134.76 (talk · contribs) and 67.100.49.172 (talk · contribs) as well as 67.101.128.6 (talk · contribs) (all same person)

He has repeatedly attempted (and failed, miserably i might add) to add linkspam to The Da Vinci Code and associated pages. Gwernol, Pegasus1138, and I have managed to get him at least twice already, but he shows no signs of letting up. He has also made personal attacks against User:Rodgerbales here. The IP user does not respond to warnings, but instead posts very long-winded messages blaming Rodgerbales for "wiping out links" when in fact it is the CVU/RCP/etc. reverting vandalism; see this diff. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 05:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Irishpunktom (talk · contribs)

Irishpunktom has for a long insisted on calling me a "racist" on a number of peoples talkpages and in edit summaries such as here (19 April 2006), here (22 May 2006}, and here (22 May 2006). He claims that he is allowed to make personal attacks against me, arguing that I have previous placed an external link (27 February 2006) to a website that was an angry response to the violent hate campaign against my country, in connection with the Jyllands posten cartoon controversy. I have already agreed to remove the external link some time age, and I also asked asked (9 May 2006) him to stop these personal attacks against me, but he has refused (same link) that on several (22 May 2006) occations, and continue this behavior. I am tired of Irishpunktoms mudthrowing campaign against me, and request that an admin makes it clear to him that there is no excuse for personal attacks. -- Karl Meier 11:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Adding dates to diffs inside the above comment. Link to IPK's responses on Karl's talk. (9 May 2006) - brenneman 12:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

This should go to dispute resolution. IPK should chill out in the meantime, though. - brenneman 12:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Paul Cyr (talk · contribs)

The user attacks me with false claims and acts like a pest (vandalised my userpage!). While vexing everybody with childish pranks, he keeps deleting ADMIN warnings on him, on his userpage and here above. I strongly advise to block him permanently, as all he does is being disruptive and abusive. Anithing but an asset for Misplaced Pages....Abdulrahman Jaffer Al Zadjali 12:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that the above user is a suspected sockpuppet (I did add the tag myself, but look at the contribs for evidence) who has made their own personal attacks: . This user's first edits were hostile towards another user (which is part of the evidence for being a sockpuppet) and has made very few useful contributions. Most of their edits have been in support of Pantherarosa (the suspected puppeteer) while attacking myself and Melca, who was the other user involved with the dispute with Pantherarosa. Paul Cyr 21:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Return of User:Pansophia

And the personal attack user talk page. Previous notes here. This is gross. Midgley 13:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Paul Cyr (talk · contribs)

This user trolls me and makes unwarranted assertions and utters threats. I interprete his conduct as disruptive and ATTACKS on my person. Pantherarosa 00:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Warned. --InShaneee 23:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• • • • This user continues trolling me and places baseless tags on my userpage (i found him having placed a tag almost a week ago! Without me noticing. I consider this a personal attack and slander. I is worthwhile mentioning too that Paul Cyr 's contribution log seems to consist solely of bickering, trolling and arguing. Of what good is such behavior to Misplaced Pages and our mutual efforts? I leave it to Admins to sort out the various false claims about me on several other pages, by said user. It cannot be tolerated that a kid playing snitch spreads unproven rumors at his fancy!Pantherarosa 18:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I have no time to revert the tags this user keeps re-posting in a trolling fashion. This behavior amounts to personal attacks. I ask admins to tackle the matter, in due course. I do not wish to have to deal with trolling and bad faith slanderous kids, on this forum. I want to edit and not see mine and people's precious time wasted by tending to nonsense.Pantherarosa 18:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Ironic that the above complaint contains personal attacks. Specifically, It cannot be tolerated that a kid playing snitch spreads unproven rumors at his fancy! and I do not wish to have to deal with trolling and bad faith slanderous kids

Additional personal attacks by Pantherarosa: edit summary blatant attack Paul Cyr 18:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Muhaidib (talk · contribs)

Personal attacks on myself. ed g2s • talk 11:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• "you know what eddy, it's jerks like you who make me regret the day I made this article what it is today"
• "I have to tell you people have been much happier before your skinny friend eddy opend his mouth"

• Administrative backlog
• Misplaced Pages failed proposals
• Inactive project pages