User talk:Dokzap

Dispute resolution of Gilgamesh and Heroes in Hell

Your comments on the talk page of Gilgamesh might be helpful in the current dispute resolution for this story. You can find the dispute resolution page here. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 06:11, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 04:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

• • • • • The Harmonia sock puppet issue on the noticeboard seems to have gone away or been deeply archived. In the event that I will be severely punished for not replying, based on the allegations made, I can say this: 1) Before this notification, I had no knowledge of the Harmonia account, 2) having no knowledge of the Harmonia account, it would be difficult for me to be a sockpuppet for said account, 3) as a writer in the science fiction field since 1981, I am familiar with and know many writers and editors in that field, including Janet Morris; 4) I am familiar with and have written fiction for many editors in the field, including Janet Morris, but I also know Ed Ferman, the late Brian Thomsen, Janet Berliner, Kris Rusch, Dean Wesley Smith, Gardner Dozois, Dana Stabenow, Constance Ash, and a bunch more I can't recall off the top of my head; 5) I also know Robert Silverberg, 6) I also know, well, hundreds of other writers; 7) in the context of the Gilgamesh in the Outback "Who's on first?" discussion, I was not acting as an agent for anyone other than myself and The Truth As It Can Be Known; 8) My main purpose in engaging in the discussion was to suggest a reasonable compromise solution which would accurately state the facts and avoid controversy, 9) based on comments received from neutral parties favorable to this reasonable compromise, I believe it was a reasonable compromise, 10) if this counts as sockpuppetry, a loosely defined concept which I cannot find a specific definition for, then we are all sockpuppets on this bus, and 11) it would seem the penalty for making reasonable compromise solutions seems to be harrassment, which in the long run will drive reasonable people away from an otherwise admirable enterprise, which is too bad. I think that's it.Dokzap (talk) 01:39, 23 August 2011 (UTC)Dokzap

First published

So, when do you think it was first published? When do you think that a fan could first purchase and read this story? If you are not sure, say do. If you are certain, say so and provide a reliable, independent source that says so. If the matter is ambiguous, then admit that. If you aren't prepared to say one way or another, then please step aside. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:15, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2011

Your recent edits to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

• • • • • Pointing out that a possible error regarding intellectual property could result in legal action was not intended as a legal threat. The intent was to demonstrate why a noncontroversial resolution would be preferable to a controversial resolution. While one should certainly not threaten legal action, at the same time WP should recognize that in certain matters it is important to avoid statements which people outside WP, and who do not recognize WP guidelines, might find actionable. Pointing out legal pitfalls is not a threat anymore than urging firearms safety is not assault with a deadly weapon.Dokzap (talk) 13:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)Dokzap