User talk:Giano II

Giano was deeply wrong to create the article and deeply wrong, as usual, to bark at people about it. However, I have unblocked him because this is not really about Giano, and I trust that he has the good sense to stay very far away from this situation.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• The page Jimbo was written to set the record straight. It was factual, it was referenced and it was accurate. The matter was widely known and discussed for 21 hours before I wrote the page. The page was openly writen, I also discussed it with an Arb at the time I was writing it. I posted openly concerning it on the Admins Notceboard, where upon it was vastly edited and expanded by others. The page needed to be written by an editor, who if checked would be seen to be a reliable mainspace editor; my mainspace edits are reliable. You are reading far too much into this, and quite frankly I find your aspertions insulting. If you had dealt with this matter 24 hours ago, when Wiki En began reporting it, you would not find yourself in this mess. It was not deeply wromg to write the page, it was the right thing to do. Giano (talk) 22:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is not a tabloid, sir, and your writing an article which cast aspersions upon a journalist at a reputable newspaper, based as it turns out on a misunderstanding of the facts, was completely unacceptable. Your persistent barking at others was and is equally unacceptable. As it turns out, and of course unknown to you, I was dealing with this matter in a timely fashion. But, the right way to handle it is not to write a hatchet-job article as you did, but to allow me to contact the journalist and his editors to find out the facts in an orderly manner. Your mainspace edits are precisely what is at issue here: you engaged an egregious BLP violation. I recommend that you stay very far away from doing things like this in this or any other similar situation henceforth lest you earn yourself what will be a richly deserved permanent ban.

• I cannot for the life of me understand why someone who likes to fashion himself as a good mainspace editor would even begin to imagine that the right way to respond to Mr. Hattersley's article would be to do what you did. Shame on you.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• There was no error here. It was a good block. Giano really screwed up here, and of course he is unlikely to apologize for it and accept that WP:NPA is hard policy. That I decided to be generous to him is an entirely different question.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• The latest informaton that I have is at Talk:Giles Hattersley. As it turns out, writing a hatchet job article about a man based on an alleged "lie" he told in a newspaper, was a really bad idea. The paper made an error, as it turns out. Even if the claim were to have been true, Wikipedia is not a tabloid, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and writing an article like that which was almost completely about this one article, is just not even remotely acceptable. In my view, Giano has crossed a very big line here.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Just a second here - why have you put "lie" in speech marks - I never used that word - I used the word "error" get your facts straight Wales - if you can. Now I'm out of here, you keep that page deleted because if people see it, they may just wonder what you are talking about. Giano (talk) 00:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The dreadful paragraph for which I'm so despised.

Seeing as I am out of here in a few moments and there is nothing more wales can do to me here is the dreadful paragraph that has upset people so. It was actually still in the talk page [1] history - which is quite funny: The article had one more paragraph I can't rmember it all, but basically it was birth year, education and what little CV I could find, I think it was mostly added by others and all referenced, there was nothing untoward or untrue.Giano (talk) 00:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

"On 8 February 2009, Hattersley wrote in The Sunday Times that his English Wikipedia entry falsely claimed he was the son of politician Roy Hattersley. The Telegraph journalist Shane Richmond noted that Hattersley did not appear to have a Wikipedia biographical entry at the time, and that there did not appear to have been one in the past. "

That is it - all there is to it. That's the "hatchet job." Giano (talk) 00:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I have scrambled my password when I log off in a few moments that will be the end of Giano II. I don't wnat Jimbo's "generosity." In fact, I can't keep ignoring things that stare me in the face so much. I tried to leave many times before. This time, I think I may just make it. So long. Giano (talk) 23:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)