Jump to content

User talk:SPECIFICO: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Neotarf (talk | contribs)
m ANI: fix link
DangerousPanda (talk | contribs)
ANI: 1-way IBAN notification
Line 97: Line 97:


Have you been watching the discussion about you at [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#SPECIFICO.27s_WP:WIKIHOUNDING_of_Carolmooredc_-_Proposal_of_Two_Way_Interaction_Ban]]? What do you think of an interaction ban? If Carol would agree to one, would you agree? Regards, —[[User:Neotarf|Neotarf]] ([[User talk:Neotarf|talk]]) 03:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Have you been watching the discussion about you at [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#SPECIFICO.27s_WP:WIKIHOUNDING_of_Carolmooredc_-_Proposal_of_Two_Way_Interaction_Ban]]? What do you think of an interaction ban? If Carol would agree to one, would you agree? Regards, —[[User:Neotarf|Neotarf]] ([[User talk:Neotarf|talk]]) 03:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
: I will advise you that based on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=625519727&oldid=625519610 this close] of the community discussion, you are now subject to a 1-way [[WP:IBAN|interaction ban]] with [[User:Carolmooredc]]. Please take great care in reading all other warnings provided in the close. You were, indeed, extremely close to a site ban, and this should be a wakeup call <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User talk:DangerousPanda|<font style="color:#ffffff;background:black;"> the panda </font><font style="color:#000000;background:white;"> ₯’</font>]]</span></small> 13:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:34, 14 September 2014

ANI notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

WP:ANI Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

GA reassessment for Murray Rothbard article

Murray Rothbard, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, SPECIFICO. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Do not edit my comments in any way.

If you feel I am in violation of personal attack policy, take it to an admin board. Your judgement and hypocrisy with regards to standards of personal commentary is suspect. -- Netoholic @ 20:24, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have previously been told not to post on my talk page and blocked for your personal attacks here. Don't post here again. SPECIFICO talk 20:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The edit

...is this one. —Neotarf (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- There is no reference to any individual as a girl or a boy, either of which can be used either tongue in cheek or as a slur depending on the context. It's clear from the context in which I used both words that there was no slur intended and at most a mild rebuke of the mooted viewpoint that we evoke gender stereotypes in deciding the merits of a new user interface. I regret that you misunderstood. Thanks for your response. SPECIFICO talk 17:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nonetheless, there are those who may interpret the comment as condescending and disrespectful. Would it be appropriate to refer to the Barack Obama, Al Gore, and Martin Luther King articles as "articles about boys who've won Nobel prizes, academic honors, and national elections"? I suspect many would find that patronizing. —Neotarf (talk) 19:15, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not understanding you. Where did I or anyone else refer to any identified individual as a boy or girl? Furthermore the boy and girl reference was to prospective WP editors, not to the individuals about whom there are WP articles. You appear to have repeated a concern which I had hoped I addressed in my initial reply to you. SPECIFICO talk 20:09, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is there something wrong with the link in my initial post? The text is here:

GG talk page

Hi Specifico, I'd like to ask that you cut Carol some slack on the gender gap task force page. She's doing good work – for example, she has just finished compiling a list of articles about the gender gap, which she obviously put a lot of time into.

People there don't have to agree about everything. The best thing is to focus on the issues we do agree on, and try to overlook the rest. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I agree we needn't agree, but I do think it's important to be clear and accurate in our discourse. I am generally impressed with the high quality of the Project. SPECIFICO talk 22:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think high precision matters much on that page, because nothing hangs on it. It matters more that people feel comfortable posting. I set the page up hoping it could become a place where women especially – and perhaps in particular new women editors – could feel relaxed, and might want to exchange ideas about working together or helping each other, or how to encourage other women. So anything that keeps the atmosphere friendly and warm would be very helpful. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:38, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you. SPECIFICO talk 22:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! SlimVirgin (talk) 22:52, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just leave her alone? If she wants to archive something, let her do it. Several of those threads descended into baiting (or began that way), and all they're doing is discouraging others from joining in. Continually responding to her or reverting is probably just making her nervous, which in turn opens her to more baiting. It needs to stop, so please be part of making that happen. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I had felt that I was being responsive to your concern by not commenting on her ongoing personal attacks and autobiographical reflections on the talk page. I think your initial advice above was valid, and I wish that the suspected male editors whom she seems to target would just back away for a while. The thread which I de-archived did not appear to contain any personal attacks or other inappropriate comments, hence my restoration of it. Nonetheless, I'm fine with staying off the page altogether if you think that will help the Project. I must say, however that CMDC's behavior on GG and on Jimbo Talk is hurting the cause of gender-neutrality. From the perspective of the community, but particularly those concerned with the role of women here, she needs to control her behavior (regardless of whether its caused by hostility, nerves, or as she sometimes says, old age.) She needs to give it a rest. Anyway you are clearly working to make things better on WP and I did not intend to go against your advice. Consider perhaps some gentle mentoring or therapy for CMDC on these points, if you feel it would help. Thanks for your note. SPECIFICO talk 21:40, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think staying away for a bit (or at least staying away from Carol's posts) would help a lot, so thank you. The best way forward is to respond positively to suggestions that might work and don't respond to the rest. We all make suggestions that aren't quite right, and we all have different styles of interaction. The trick is to focus on the good things that people have to offer, and overlook everything else, which I know is hard, and I'm not good at doing it myself. But that's the atmosphere that would be most helpful on that page. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but remember I had already begun doing that and the archiving she did was not a suggestion of hers, I'm afraid, but rather a knee-jerk swat in the face of a few clearly-reasoned opinions which differed from her own. Ignoring disruptive behavior gets close to the affirmative-action model and as I think is clear, her behavioral issues have nothing to do with her gender. Anyway, consider me on hiatus and thanks again for your clarity. SPECIFICO talk 00:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Wanna help with a woman ?

Hello Fico. I have noticed you have showed great interest lately in improving articles or women of real notability and I know from before that you have a good grasp on economics. So I wondered if you would be willing to help with an article of a female economist I just started, Hélène Rey. She's a co-winner with Thomas Picketty of the Yrjö Jahnsson Award, the first woman to win the prize. I have written most of the biographic stuff (will add some more and polish), but what I need help to is to flesh out her economic ideas. Just a paragraph will be all right. Then we could take the article through DYK to the front page. There is light intro to her ideas in a FT interview. Best, Iselilja (talk) 20:39, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a humble beginning. There should be ample material which we can locate by finding responses to the work posted on her personal website. I hope that other editors will join in. I'll also post on the Economics Project. SPECIFICO talk 18:53, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"ce"

Please do not mark major, substantive edits as "ce". I assume "ce" means "copy edit". If that's the case, then copy editing: "work that an editor does to improve the formatting, style, and accuracy of text. Unlike general editing, copy editing might not involve changing the content of the text". If you are going to change substantive content, then please be clear about that in your edit summary. -- Netoholic @ 19:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've been told many times not to post on this page. SPECIFICO talk 19:42, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ARBCOM clarification request regarding use of "TERF"

I have initiated a request for clarification from the ARBCOM regarding the use of "TERF" per discussions on Talk:Radical feminism. I am messaging you because you have been involved in past discussions regarding this issue and may wish to participate in the new discussion at the ARBCOM. The discussion can be found here. Thank you and best wishes. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for following process and notifying editors so as to ensure an unbiased presentation of the issues. SPECIFICO talk 22:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Negative comments

The negative comments you are making at the Gender gap task force are not helpful. For instance this one, discouraging the recruitment of female admins. The whole purpose of the group is to encourage participation by more women, it is not a place to argue about whether women's participation is a real issue. —Neotarf (talk) 23:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but my intention was to make a constructive and specific suggestion as to how we can move forward. Perhaps we can both consider how our understandings of these words led to a disconnect. Thanks for expressing your concern. SPECIFICO talk 00:11, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 04:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RFAR

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Gender Gap Task Force Issues and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks, Robert McClenon (talk) 16:29, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Have you been watching the discussion about you at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#SPECIFICO.27s_WP:WIKIHOUNDING_of_Carolmooredc_-_Proposal_of_Two_Way_Interaction_Ban? What do you think of an interaction ban? If Carol would agree to one, would you agree? Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 03:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will advise you that based on this close of the community discussion, you are now subject to a 1-way interaction ban with User:Carolmooredc. Please take great care in reading all other warnings provided in the close. You were, indeed, extremely close to a site ban, and this should be a wakeup call the panda ₯’ 13:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]