This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mcfnord (talk | contribs) at 20:20, 31 January 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:20, 31 January 2019 by Mcfnord (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)I like turtles.
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Misplaced Pages has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I restored your removal of material at Rick Gates because you did not accurately reflect BLP policy. There is no BLP reason not to cover the lawsuits properly, and these are widely reported not some obscure cases. Legacypac (talk) 07:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- I guess so for such a notable person. Mcfnord 17:07, December 19, 2018 (UTC)
- I suggest you take your understandings about massive deletions of properly sourced content from BLPs to the proper notice board (WP:BLP/N) and discuss your ideas with others. If you're right, maybe you can get our BLP policy changed. Right now you seem to be allowing your BLP concerns to override multiple other policies and practices.
- I've been here since 2003 and have never encountered another editor who thinks like you about this. If we need to improve our policies and practices, then so be it. The way to do that is to get our policies changed, not by edit warring or being in conflict with other editors.
- I'm sorry I haven't been more helpful and engaged more fully, but life's a bit rough right now, and we're just hoping to have a bit of Xmas without too much more tragedy in our lives. At least we are safe, have food, and some shelter, which is more than many around here. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 22:49, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
BullRangifer, my conclusion is roughly that you have some confusion about BLP. Your conclusion is that do. I'm certainly still the newbie, but I have been forged in a crucible of fire, a professional writer with now substantial exposure to criminal and civil litigation. You wield the hammer but not so much the pen. I see you righting the rats who think RT is a source, and I 100% agree. We agree about misinformation and sourcing (mostly). It's WP:UNDUE and the historical focus of an encyclopedia where we differ. I do think I am what an editor called a "deletionist" because absolutely I see the historical implications of, say, a criminal conviction totally drowned in the noise of unsubstantiated accusations that are a part of every trial. You defend what no encyclopedia would include. You are perhaps an anti-deletionist. BLP interests me because it's a conservative form of writing. At times I'll leave BLP topics on Misplaced Pages and wander into some non-human topic... and can feel the standards shift radically. That's fine. I am disturbed that you (a) know person X is noteable for one event, but (b) treat them like a generally noteworthy person. You hold both ideas somehow. I don't. I was quite proud of a recent surge of in unsubstantiated claims in the Suge Knight page. The same should be said of criminal allegations, and I don't think that's controversial, though I suspect not many have the legal understanding required to make that differentiation. It wouldn't surprise me if my specialized interests bring me to precise conclusions about the nature of conservative writing about legal issues. If mine is your first exposure to these, that could be because I'm on the wrong track, or it could be because you are. You aren't prioritizing finding out, so I won't, either. I intend to continue sharpening my views on these topics by working closely with people who have the time to help. An encyclopedia aspires to boil down what's important to history, and a lot of facts just don't make the cut. This is most critically true in the BLP. Cheers and regards. Mcfnord (talk) 01:27, December 25, 2018 (UTC)
Welcome!
|
Discretionary sanctions alert for articles and content relating to post-1932 American politics and articles relating to living or recently deceased people
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Template:Z33 Doug Weller talk 08:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
January 2019
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Roger Stone. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
- I remember you. I think you tried once to omit subject denials. Same thing he did. The pattern of reverts show a focus on non-encyclopedia writing objectives.
- Mcfnord also violated 1RR rule on Roger Stone: 1, 2, 3. My very best wishes (talk) 19:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
- Mcfnord, if I were you, I would self-revert. You have unambiguously violated the article editing restrictions.- MrX 🖋 19:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
- See a thread I just initiated about the restrictions at WP:AN.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
I've tried to keep 24 hours in mind. I've also tried engaging as instructed. Please look on MrX talk where I mistakenly engaged in the first and second instance. I eventually engaged on the subject Talk. (I had misread the rules for these highly controlled pages, and talked to the individual rather than on the subject page.) That editor ignored me and that's a croc, so I entreated a response. All three of you powerful editors have thrown out the good shit, including known subject denials. Quote the fix where an editor tells MrX maybe he could re-add the word "five" rather than trashing the whole lede improvement. Using the built-in link addition tool shouldn't merit a revert. It merits collaboration! I was rather upset and I remember feeling upset. But it's not really a dialogue so far, and of course that's upsetting. You'all can ride my nips long and hard but you aren't writing an encyclopedia when you treat denial claims with skepticism and treat criminal charges with religious reverenece. I just don't buy it. I have now a long history writing Misplaced Pages about legal scenarios and BLPs. I continue acting in good faith. I'm still new and want to learn here. If you think I'm off somewhere, please do push it back and I'll take like 48 hours to think about it for a while.
"Process crimes!" lol