| Revision as of 03:03, 25 June 2009 editMark Ironie (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers33,764 edits rmv archived messages← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:22, 1 July 2009 edit undoCandorwien (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,700 edits →Requesting an outside opinion: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 113: | Line 113: | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| ::*<small>Newsletter delivery by <font face="Verdana">]</font> 17:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)</small> | ::*<small>Newsletter delivery by <font face="Verdana">]</font> 17:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)</small> | ||
| == Requesting an outside opinion == | |||
| Hi Pigman - I picked up your name from your offer to help at ]. I've been editing for a few years but no on a regular basis. Recently, I have been involved mainly with the ] and ] pages. | |||
| One editor ] appears to me to really be sailing very close to the wind on a number of issues. The editor has declared a POV (running an anti-IB website). . However, it is very difficult for me to work with this editor as (to my mind) they are at the very least uncivil. Personally, I find them almost harassing and aggressive on the talk page and unresponsive to questions - they cherry pick statements (sometimes misattributing them to a particular editor) so they can throw in some snide remarks and a little bit of name calling. | |||
| In addition, ObserverNY seems to gainsay often and assume bad faith. I'm not claiming my behaviour was perfect (I know I lost the plot a couple of times) and I know I certainly could have responded better at some points. However, there are a number of editors who are certainly behaving very well on the page and yet I feel that ObserverNY isn't really responding to their calls to be calm and reasonable. | |||
| I really would like you to take the time to read the current talk page and give me feedback on: | |||
| *1. My behaviour and how I could have helped de-escalate any conflict a lot earlier. | |||
| *2. Your opinion of the behaviour of ObserverNY | |||
| Also, I would value your suggestions on what I can do to restore civility on the talk pages. | |||
| Thanks in advance, | |||
| --] (]) 07:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:22, 1 July 2009
User:Pigman/Talktop User:Pigman/HeaderTabs Template:Archive box collapsible
Leave a new message.Please sign your message by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~
| Conflict of Interest Disclosure |
|---|
|
Due to some questions about conflict of interest issues with a document I helped author and publish, it seems appropriate that I disclose my connection and role vis-à-vis The CR FAQ. This information includes both the web document as well as the printed/dead tree version. I am one of the co-owners of the domain paganachd.com. The domain hosts The CR FAQ and related articles. This is not a commercial or even non-profit enterprise. There are no ads on the web site but there is a link to buy the printed version of the CR FAQ. All profits from sales the printed version are donated to An Comunn Gàidhealach Ameireaganach for Gaelic language preservation. The sole purpose of the web domain is to provide access to the collaboratively created document known as The CR FAQ and directly related articles. I believe The CR FAQ is a salient secondary source document. I am also co-editor and co-publisher of the the print version of the document, titled The CR FAQ - An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism. I mistakenly used the web site as a source in the Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism article before being clear on the COI problems of my actions. If you have any questions regarding my relationship to the domain and document, please ask me here. (Note: I'm deliberately not using external links to the site or book to avoid using Misplaced Pages to drive traffic to them.) |
 |
|---|
| 15 January 2025 |
|
about Demonologist
as you participated in editing of Demonologist article, you mignt have an opinion for Talk:Demonology#Demonology in fiction (Idot (talk) 02:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC))
WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)
| The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter: Special Pride 2009 Booty call edition | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Requesting an outside opinion
Hi Pigman - I picked up your name from your offer to help at Wiki Assistance Page. I've been editing for a few years but no on a regular basis. Recently, I have been involved mainly with the IB Diploma wiki and talk pages.
One editor User_talk:ObserverNY appears to me to really be sailing very close to the wind on a number of issues. The editor has declared a POV (running an anti-IB website). . However, it is very difficult for me to work with this editor as (to my mind) they are at the very least uncivil. Personally, I find them almost harassing and aggressive on the talk page and unresponsive to questions - they cherry pick statements (sometimes misattributing them to a particular editor) so they can throw in some snide remarks and a little bit of name calling.
In addition, ObserverNY seems to gainsay often and assume bad faith. I'm not claiming my behaviour was perfect (I know I lost the plot a couple of times) and I know I certainly could have responded better at some points. However, there are a number of editors who are certainly behaving very well on the page and yet I feel that ObserverNY isn't really responding to their calls to be calm and reasonable.
I really would like you to take the time to read the current talk page and give me feedback on:
- 1. My behaviour and how I could have helped de-escalate any conflict a lot earlier.
- 2. Your opinion of the behaviour of ObserverNY
Also, I would value your suggestions on what I can do to restore civility on the talk pages.
Thanks in advance, --Candy (talk) 07:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)