Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:51, 11 June 2012

My Talk Archives CAMH_Promotion

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Moved from Talk

When WLU was at 3RR and in need of fourth reverts, 203.118.x.x's response times were 9 hrs and 3 hrs. This question to 203.118.x.x has gone unanswered for a month (seven hundred hours). While we are to assume good faith, 203.118.x.x appears only to edit when WLU was in an edit conflict and loosing, and then only during a specific window of time. While he has twice engaged in edit wars here, he has yet to make non-personal contributions to discussion. This pattern is not consistent with good faith editing. It is consistent with a meatpuppet, or the use of an IP by WLU while traveling.

I suspect that this comment will be shortly followed by another by WLU. WLU has yet to answer the simple question I asked to 203.118.x.x. His responses serve only to obscure the fact that 203.118.x.x has not respond at all. BitterGrey (talk) 13:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Multiple administrators at the SPI you started described your allegations of sock-puppeting as "fishing" and incorrect. Returning here to continue the allegations in another forum is just plain disruptive. I am going to hat this discussion. Please limit your comments on this talkpage to improvements to the article.--Slp1 (talk) 21:24, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, before Slp1 and other friends of WLU got involved, the archived conclusion of SPI was that they "Definitely were socks".

Slp1, where were you when WLU was edit warring to make personal comments about my sexuality? Please be aware that "checks" (the word you used at SPI) is ambiguous, at least in US English. If you were exchanging and cashing checks with WLU as part of a financial relationship, you really shouldn't be intervening on his behalf at SPI and here.

Slp1, I'd like you to ask you to set aside your off-wiki friendship with WLU for a minute and carefully read both paragraphs of that first diff. Three points are important: 1) WLU wrote "I agree that Freund & Blanchard don't use the term "infantilism"". He recently deleted a section from another article because it's source didn't use the term. At the time, he was trying to equate "masochistic gynephile" with infantilism. However, F&B define a gynephile simply as one who loves women, and don't define masochistic gynephiles as anything other than masochists who are gynephilic. No other source uses "masochistic gynephile" as a term. F&B could have used the term "infantilism", already established in the DSM and in other sources, but chose not to. 2) WLU concedes the need to "temporarily WP:IAR|ignore the policy on synthesis". Since he shows no willingness to let others edit, the effect of this ignorance of policy is effectively permanent. Using F&B is in violation of policy. Whether its current use violates WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, or both is a moot debate - the violation should be removed in any case. 3) All of this is good and necessary because I'm a pervert. Is this really the kind of position that you, as an admin, want to enforce? BitterGrey (talk) 13:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Since you appear to insist on continuing this offtopic discussion, I've moved it here. BitterGrey, this really, really, really needs to stop. There are gross misrepresentations here and we are continuing well into disruption territory.

• As you well know, the admin who stated that WLU and the IP were socks withdrew the conclusion and apologized to WLU. He stated that he was mistaken and had been working too fast. You should be glad that the mistake was corrected; blaming others for the correction seems to be WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour at its height.
• It is the height of bad faith and smearing to even suggest that from "WLU has occasionally asked me for copies of scholarly articles I have access to via my work, and has, as a result, trusted me with his real name. I also know where he lives and other details of his personal life. Checks indicate that these disclosures have been truthful" could infer that a financial relationship. I even self-disclose as a Canadian, for goodness sake, and we write it "cheques" here.
• Straw men arguments are also singularly inappropriate. As is bringing up again and again issues that have been solved. I don't see any accusation of you being a "pervert" in any of WLU's edits you list; he is clearly discussing the meat of the conflict with someone, you, who clearly states that you run website about paraphilic infantilism on your userpage, and on that website describe your experiences as one.. Nevertheless, if your objection was to being called a paraphilic infantilist on Misplaced Pages (which isn't, to me, an insult or negative and shouldn't be to you or others either), then, as you know, he corrected his description when requested to do so by another admin..
• No, I will not be looking at the content aspect of this dispute, for the simple reason that based on your past history with me and others, you will dismiss anything I say as being biased my "off-wiki friendship with WLU" (not that I have one). It is not worth the trouble, frankly.

As I said at the beginning, BG, these mischaracterizations, failure to assume good faith and other battleground behaviours, need to stop. They really do. Slp1 (talk) 17:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)