Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by H (talk | contribs) at 19:17, 9 December 2006 (adding context). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User talk:HighInBC/Header

User_talk:HighInBC/Potentially_not_notable_articles

Might want to kill this one too. -Patstuart 18:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, fergot that one. HighInBC 18:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: AGF

• This conversation is in reference to HighInBC 19:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments such as 'I'm sure being gay and having a sense of humor didn't help either' are unhelpful and fail to assume good faith. You have been talked to about assuming good faith before. Please provide evidence when insinuating an admin is bigoted or is will be construed as a personal attack. If you cannot find evidence then keep it to yourself for the sake of civility, which is not optional here. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

It always tickles me when an admin lectures me on a guideline without actually reading (or reflecting upon) said guideline.

• WP:AGF has to do with article edits, as was intended to protect edits from bad faith for the sake of the project as a whole.

• WP:AGF -- Consider using talk pages to explain yourself, and give others the opportunity to do the same.

I was doing that until I discovered a reaching accusation on my talk page.

• You have been talked to about assuming good faith before.

Irrelevant, and an attempt to marginalize. (Also known as a personal attack.)

• Please provide evidence when insinuating an admin is bigoted

Can you provide evidence that would point to a particular administrator? If not, then you can't exactly accuse me of making a personal attack. What, we're not allowed to be critical of the system? A certain date in time comes to mind. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 22:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I have responded to this on you talkpage. HighInBC 22:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• is will be construed as a personal attack.

So you're allowed to constue my impersonal and indirect words as a personal attack, but I'm not allowed to construe the case against Timecop as anything but an act of justice as pure as the Virgin Mary? OK, I see. I better shut up then. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 22:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I have responded to this on you talkpage. HighInBC 22:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• You were insinuating that at least one admin, if not more were being bigoted towards gay people.

It's unfortunate that you've decided to spin what I said, and yes, I mean to say 'spin' because the meaning is severely shifted when you cut and paste selective parts of a single sentence. The complete sentence was, "I'm sure being gay and having a sense of humor didn't help either." Is there such thing as a bigot against funny people? No, that's just absurd - and it was equally absurd for me to suggest that him being sarcastic and silly was a real reason for his indef ban.

So what you're really accusing me of is attacking one or more admins of hating "funny gay people." I guess you're trying to be funny as well. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 23:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Suffice it to say I respectfully disagree and my position remains the same. HighInBC 23:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, my position on hyperbole remains the same. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 23:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary: I will spell it out. Please hold yourself to the same civility standards as you expect of others, otherwise I'll happly use "I'll spell it out" in all of my edit summaries. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 23:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

You were complaining I has used the term Personal attack when I was meaning to refer to a more general violation of WP:CIVILITY. I think you are a very intelligent person, and I saw you were using this point to argue against my position. So I clarified it, in other words I spelled it out. If you can explain how this is uncivil I will certainly listen. HighInBC 23:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have the patience to spell it out for you. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 23:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

lol, thanks, I needed a laugh. Hey, no hard feelings, this is about policy, not about you as a person. HighInBC 23:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem; points taken. Feel free to clean your talk page of this conversation. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 23:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Where is the civility problem? Yaf has changed an article title without representative consensus and refused to rebut or even acknowledge the logical thought process for fixing the article. If there was at least a dialog, I wouldn't have to be so stern. I'm perfectly easy to work with if people with USE THE TALK PAGE as opposed to making edits without explaination. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 02:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

If my "Guns/Fireworks" example would be disruptive to Misplaced Pages, then please address Yaf's edits to the article started as "Gun Control," and is linked from the subsection "Gun Control" from the dominant article "Gun Politics in the United States." Just look at the talk page there. I beg of you. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 02:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, by 'there' I mean Talk:Gun_(Firearm)_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)#Suggested_changes_to_this_page --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 02:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

...and implore you to read to the bottom of the page. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 02:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

...and please don't stop reading to address civilitiy issues. I lost my patience a long time ago, I realize that. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 02:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Personal attack removed HighInBC 19:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)