| Revision as of 14:56, 24 May 2012 editArcandam (talk | contribs)10,103 edits →User:Arcandam & User:Dan56← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 05:37, 29 November 2020 edit undoJPxG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators119,109 edits diff links more clear | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{short description|Historical document}} | |||
| :__NEWSECTIONLINK__ | |||
| {{historical}} | |||
| '''Wikiquette assistance''' was an informal process, ], available to editors who felt that they were being treated uncivilly. There was about its effectiveness, and a consensus was formed to eliminate the Wikiquette assistance process. This page was formally ]. | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| If you require assistance with resolving a content issue, please see ]. | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette assistance/Header}} | |||
| For a similar noticeboard which was also discontinued and marked historical, see ]. | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |archiveheader = {{archivemainpage|Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette assistance}} | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 200K | |||
| |counter = 118 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 1 | |||
| |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| |algo = old(5d) | |||
| |archive = Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette assistance/archive%(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| {{noindex}} | |||
| {| class="wikitable" style="float:left;vertical-align:top;" | |||
| <!-- NOTE: If the archive navbox needs a new row, update ]. This must be done manually, but the process should be pretty self-explanatory once you open the template. --> | |||
| | width="300" style="text-align:center;"| '''Search the ]''' | |||
| {{TOC limit|limit=2}} | |||
| |- | |||
| |<inputbox> | |||
| = Active discussions = | |||
| type=fulltext | |||
| <!-- Do not change this line. Your report should go below this line and below all other reports. --> | |||
| prefix=Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette assistance | |||
| break=no | |||
| == User Lugnuts == | |||
| width=40 | |||
| searchbuttonlabel=Search | |||
| * {{userlinks|Lugnuts}} | |||
| </inputbox> | |||
| |} | |||
| We are having a content dispute. It is addressed here and I brought it to a talk page for a discussion. Rather than reply on my talk page to his posts, he has replied back at my talk page even though I have asked him repeatedly not to. Here, here, here, here and here. And my requests here, here, and here. This is harassment and I want it stopped.] 17:11, 19 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Calling another editor's edit is inappropriate. If William doesn't want Lugnuts posting on his talk page he shouldn't be posting on Lugnuts. Best to take the discussion to the article talk page. <small>]</small> 02:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == User:Arcandam & User:Dan56== | |||
| <!-- Do not change this line. Your report should go below this line. --> | |||
| <!-- Including yourself, list editors that are involved, copy and paste the template if more than 2 editors are involved. --> | |||
| * {{userlinks|Dan56}} <!-- editor 1--> | |||
| * {{userlinks|Arcandam}} <!-- editor 2--> | |||
| <!-- Please note that you must manually notify every user mentioned above. You may place the following template on their talk page to notify them. {{subst:WQA-notice}} --> | |||
| <!-- Place the names of involved articles or tag pages in this section --> | |||
| * I guess our respective talk pages, better explained below. | |||
| <!-- Place a description of your situation below this line. As appropriate, include links and diffs to aid WQA volunteers in understand the situation. --> | |||
| User:Arcandam keeps harrassing my talk page with warnings misconstruing every edit I make. He's done it a couple of times before (). I think it started with I used to him after he made unexplained, unconstructive changes to the article that we were discussing. We've been in discussion on ], where he responded to the previous with "editsummaries suck", and he's been pretty hostile to me there. I've tried to make nice and be humble at and the discussion page, so the discussion is about the content and not our character, but he's responded with accusations, calling me ignorant about the topic of the articles I edit, and does not assume good faith because I disagree with him on certain content. I'm clearly on his bad side. One of his main accusations is that I ], b/c I asked editors of music-related articles to comment on a music-related discussion, and I primarily edit those kind of articles. He uses this to undermine any logical argument I make. Both at his talk page and the discussion page, he's threatened to follow the edits I make, so isnt that sort of uncivil or wrong? He is not considering anything I say, so I'm done trying his talk page. Can you please help? He seems to respond better to others who havent debated him yet. ] (]) 20:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :LOL. As I've told you before, there is a log of every edit we've made. And ]'s hurt. But since I agree you are at the right page here, you do need some Wikiquette assistance, here we go: | |||
| :We've met because I ] to (which is also known as "pop rap") on ]. If I would've known what a minefield full of ]S the genre-line in infoboxes is I would've never bothered specifying the correct genre. You disagreed with my edit, and . So I a ] as a ] and I . I am not a native speaker, so it takes more edits for me to post a message that is comprehensible and free of typo's than for some other editors. You with the editsummary: "Rm, dubious post (took 5 edits?)". Then you ] me to ] (a genre you previously weren't even aware existed), and nominated ] and ] out of revenge because you think I prefer Indie hip hop. | |||
| :A couple of Dan56 quotes from our conversations: | |||
| :* (editsummary used while deleting my comment from the AfD discussion) | |||
| :*Wait, but what would a foreigner know about American music anyway. | |||
| :*It is quite obvious you're losing your mind. '''Nota bene:''' When another editor said "there's no need for this" he responded with "Well he must be." | |||
| :*Let's agree to disagree on that article, but don't question my knowledge on any music, let alone hip hop. | |||
| :*You can learn something from me about hip hop. | |||
| :*Not only I am involved in my local scene in New York, I took a class on hip hop in college and know plenty from using GoogleBooks to research hip hop history and culture. | |||
| :*R U being a sore loser? | |||
| :*I've written and edited plenty of hip hop articles on WP, so please don't question my judgement here. | |||
| :*He has the header "diversion" above my comments. | |||
| :*When deleting user warning templates he likes to use the phrase "takin(sic) out the trash" <small>(Apparently this is what he considers to be "nice and be humble"...)</small> | |||
| :This is not limited to me, some recent Dan56 quotes about other people: | |||
| :*Can you help knock some sense into him? | |||
| :*And who are you to call me a control freak? | |||
| :Dan56 may think he is an expert on hip hop but : "There's no name for it, like there's not "hip pop", or "pop rap". It's not a legit/accepted term.". I some of the many sources. To make the ] situation with Dan56 & ] clear I even posted a ], e.g. . I showed the fact the terms are frequently in use , 8000 potential sources on Google Books alone, if I search for "hippop" on Google (including quotes!) I get about half a million results. If I search for "hip pop" I get well over 4 million. If I search for "pop rap" I get 5 1/4th million and if I search for "poprap" I get 80k more.. ] has . If he was an expert on hiphop he would've been aware of the existence of this subgenre. | |||
| :I ] (at that point his latest edit was ) and he said he had on 20 May at 03:44. Since then he has made these edits (among others): | |||
| :A selection of his edits from between 19 May 2012 02:24 and 20 May at 03:42 | |||
| : agree his choice of audience was "]" because it consists of inactive users who may disagree and people he knows and likes. (because they have a similar interest) | |||
| :He even removed some of the requests for support because he felt they were not needed anymore (which prevented the risk that those editors disagreed with him). . | |||
| :Some . He even canvassed for . | |||
| :Dan56 is one of those intentionally annoying people who give you a nickname and use it even after you repeatedly ask him not to. In my case he tried to troll by using 'bro'. I told him I am not his 'bro' and asked him to stop a number of times but he continued. It backfired, because it gave me the right to call him 'sis'. Doing that just once has been effective so far; he hasn't called me 'bro' since. ] (]) 02:40, 23 May 2012 (UTC) p.s. To be continued... | |||
| *The blind are leading the blind. runs counter to the suggestion that we don't template the regulars. Then things got worse, with barbs back and forth, and as far as I'm concerned to see that dickishness comes from both sides here. Oh, if "bro" is trolling, then so is "dude." I think both of you need to take a break from each other. An interaction ban is a bit far-fetched, but it would be wise for the both of you to refrain from interacting. If you comment on the same AfD or article talk page, don't comment on each other's comments--that would be a good start. ] (]) 14:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*I never claimed to be ] (a great example of the blind leading the blind by the way). Templating the regulars is unimportant; that template runs counter to the suggestion that we use templates in cases where they are applicable. I hope Dan56 stops trying to follow me around. ] (]) 14:56, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::But it's quite consistent with the suggestion ] template the regulars. Beyond that, concur. <small>]</small> 14:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == A provocation == | |||
| {{NWQA | Refer to MfD discussion ] ] 06:30, 24 May 2012 (UTC)}} | |||
| <!-- Do not change this line. Your report should go below this line. --> | |||
| <!-- Including yourself, list editors that are involved, copy and paste the template if more than 2 editors are involved. --> | |||
| * {{userlinks|Drmies}} <!-- editor 1--> | |||
| * {{userlinks|Tempac3}} <!-- editor 2--> | |||
| <!-- Please note that you must manually notify every user mentioned above. You may place the following template on their talk page to notify them. {{subst:WQA-notice}} --> | |||
| <!-- Place the names of involved articles or tag pages in this section --> | |||
| * | |||
| <!-- Place a description of your situation below this line. As appropriate, include links and diffs to aid WQA volunteers in understand the situation. --> | |||
| An attempt to delete my userspace pages. | |||
| Probably a personal issue - the ticket was filled on false grounds: 1) - I have edited Misplaced Pages outside of my userspace (as Tempac3, not as an IP) and 2) - both pages have been edited recently. Furthermore, I have left a message along an IP edit by me that I can confirm that is my account if requested . | |||
| He must have been looking for an opportunity to get back at me because I called him an asshole a while back (I was a new member then and was supported by an admin and a long-standing member). | |||
| I'd like to notify the board in case such incidents occur in the future with this admin, and also, if he vandalizes my userspace again - be blocked from my userspace altogether. | |||
| PS: Another user has to support the false ticket - take a note of that as well. {{unsigned|Tempac3}} | |||
| *Ahem. OK, "false ticket"? The account hadn't edited since . The "message" is , I suppose--well, I guess I don't understand why I should have requested the IP to sign in and confirm (which strictly speaking probably isn't "evidence"), or why the account didn't sign in in the first place. The "vandalism" accusation is of course ridiculous.<p>As for the forum: this almost suggests that the user is filing this to report themselves for calling me an asshole; I'll have a look at the diff, but given my advanced age combined with the number of edits I make (and insults I receive) I think I should be excused for having forgotten that they insulted me. Hold on: ... ] (]) 14:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Ah yes: my congratulations to Tempac3 for his excellent memory! That was a silly discussion and you'll note that I didn't make anything of it. If I wanted to retaliate I wouldn't have waited seven months. BTW, I don't think I'm out of line with . Well, I'm glad that's cleared up. As far as I am concerned, this being the etiquette board, I forgive the user for having called me an asshole; I'll put it down to their youthful exuberance and possibly the mistaken thought that WP is a webhost. I won't even press charges for being called "''some'' asshole"; I like to think that I'm a more unique kind of asshole. I also think that the user should acquaint himself with various Misplaced Pages guidelines. Finally, I was then, and am now, not entirely happy with ]'s handling of the affair, though I thought it was best to let the matter rest. Thank you, ] (]) 14:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Should we invite Ezhiki to the conversation to discuss his handling of this issue? <small>]</small> 14:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Not on my account, no. I don't agree with what they said but I don't care that much--I disagree with the notion that good faith needs to be extended automatically to such edits in a registered user space, but that's just a difference in opinion and it wasn't much of an issue to begin with. I don't understand why Ezhiki told me to cool down or why they didn't comment on "some asshole" until I did, but ''soit''. If someone who walks by decides that I did ''not'' act out of retaliation (which IMO is the most obvious thing in the world) they can close this spurious complaint. If someone decides that I did act out of retaliation they should prove, one way or another, that I carried a grudge for seven months and then acted on it. BTW, I have no recollection of interacting with Tempac3 or with Ezhiki outside of this odd spat. Also, feel free to weigh in on the MfD: it's clear now, I guess, that the IP is Tempac3 and that the draft is not stale, though I can't figure out what those drafts might be for. Thanks, ] (]) 14:42, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Nick Thorne has already tagged the request NWQA which is the WQA equivalent of a close tag. <small>]</small> 14:52, 24 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:37, 29 November 2020
Historical document | 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. |
Wikiquette assistance was an informal process, set up in March 2005, available to editors who felt that they were being treated uncivilly. There was discussion among the community about its effectiveness, and a consensus was formed to eliminate the Wikiquette assistance process. This page was formally marked inactive in September 2012.
If you require assistance with resolving a content issue, please see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution.
For a similar noticeboard which was also discontinued and marked historical, see WP:PAIN.
| Search the Wikiquette archives |