User talk:JRG: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
please lay off the personal attacks |
pending retirement notice |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{retirement|User:JRG|JRG|message='''Pending Retirement'''<br><br>Dear editors, |
|||
{{wikibreak|message='''JRG''' will be on a wikibreak until '''November 21, 2008'''. I ask that no disparaging messages be left here. I am fed up with people being slack to me on here. Image notifications or article deletions will be responded to but I will try to keep away from Wiki for a while.}} |
|||
'''JRG''' has decided to retire from Wikipedia. There is one primary reason for this, but I thought I would share some comments on Wikipedia in the hope that some things can be done to improve the encyclopedia. I am sorry if these are generalisations (because there are exceptions to every rule here and I have been editing with some great editors who deserve a lot of credit - and there are lots of good editors) but this is how I feel at the moment: |
|||
I am primarily retiring because I am sick of disruptive editors running around destroying the good work that others have done. There seems to be a persistent stream of them - the first couple are thankfully gone but the current one has been left to run free. As an example, some editors spent hours helping Australian political and legal articles by adding images under old guidelines, only for that work to be destroyed by one editor in particular by disruptive IfD nominations for reasons which aren't even valid reasons for deletion. This user persisted in edit warring, and whenever confronted he merely blamed others for his misfortune. The editors was also allowed to persist in abusing other users and getting away with incivility. When I reverted (among other disruptive edits) abuse levelled at another user I was reported. That was the last straw. I cannot participate in a website where this sort of behaviour is tolerated. |
|||
I was about to post the following "keep" vote on the Beria Time image: |
|||
:*'''Keep''': Actually, it's a perfect illustration for the article [[Enemy of the people]]. Note that the notification of deletion covers the picture's caption: "July 20, 1953 [[Time (magazine)|TIME magazine]] [[irony|ironic]] cover: "[[Lavrenty Beria]]: Enemy of the people" published soon after [[Lavrentiy Beria#Beria's fall|his arrest]]." He was the chief of secret police for a regime that often condemned people as "enemies of the people" and was then himself arrested. |
|||
Should I assume it and the others that he nominated (presumably for political reasons) are safe? [[User:A2Kafir|A<sup>2</sup>Kafir]] ([[User_talk:A2Kafir|and...?]]) 01:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Some other comments: |
|||
==ANI== |
|||
*'''Subjectivity''' - I am also disappointed with the subjectivity of deletion debates. There are too many people who expect a Google search to come up with all answers to notability for an article and expect that if so many google sources can't be found that it is sufficient to delete an article. In many cases it is books and library research that would reveal otherwise. (Note I am not talking about obvious cases here or hoax articles). The entire process needs to be overhauled and more editors need to start doing some research on the notability of articles rather than relying on one's own subjective judgment. |
|||
{{ANI-notice|Wikipedia:Ani#JRG_removing_comments.2C_deletion_tag.2C_deletion_nominations }} [[User:Toddst1|Toddst1]] <small>([[User talk: Toddst1|talk]])</small> 01:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Lack of cooperation''' - I feel that editors are less cooperative about improving less-notable articles than they used to be. This is disappointing. |
|||
*'''[[WP:OWN|Own]]ership of articles''' - there are too many articles "controlled" by one editor that deter other users from editing on particular pages. |
|||
*'''Image policy''' - Wikipedia's image policy is too harsh to take into account Australian conditions. American users simply do not understand the difficulty of obtaining photos of Australian political figures compared to how easy it is to get one over there. The policies, and overseas editors, need to take into account the regional differences. |
|||
Editing here is making me stressed, so unless someone can convince me otherwise or will be prepared to clean up Wikipedia (dealing with the first reason would be a good enough reason to stay), I will be retiring from here. I may return to edit some rail-related articles and some other things I have contributed to at some stage but it would be under another username. |
|||
[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] {{#if:|Regarding your comments on [[:{{{1}}}]]: }}Please see Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|no personal attacks]] policy. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocks]] for disruption. Please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]] and keep this in mind while editing. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> Calling someone a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=249546297 "disruptive idiot"] as you did here is not appropriate or acceptable on Wikipedia. Please refrain from such insults in the future, [[User:Either way|Either way]] ([[User talk:Either way|talk]]) 01:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I have enjoyed contributing to particular pages but I cannot sustain this in the current conditions. Feel free to reply here in the next 24 hours if you want to convince me otherwise. Thank you to those who at least have made this an enjoyable time here and good luck contributing to the Australian encyclopedia. [[User:JRG|JRG]] ([[User talk:JRG#top|talk]]) 02:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)}} |
|||
Revision as of 02:23, 4 November 2008
User:JRG
JRG