User talk:Ad Orientem

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Talk:Dennis Prager

I am told "Your feelings about how Prager expresses himself have no place here. Please stop giving your personal opinions." Is this a violation of WP:BLP policy? Is it a violation of some other policy? I was under the impression that Talk pages allowed for some latitude of discussion for possible changes/improvements. You even wrote "Editors need to be able to discuss controversial topics relating to BLP subjects and the article talk page is normally where that occurs."[1] Where does that fine line get drawn between excessive discussion and necessary discussion? Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 18:37, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

On article talk pages we confine ourselves to discussions that pertain to improving the article. I do not believe that discussing private opinions about controversial aspects of a BLP subject is ipso facto a BLP-vio, especially if the issue is already noted and referenced in the article. But it may well be a violation of NOTFORUM. Again if you want to raise questions about the article and how it addresses controversial topics, this needs to be framed within WP:PAG. All of which said, a certain amount of latitude is customarily accorded on user talk pages as long as you are not promoting things that are grossly offensive illegal or otherwise a direct breach of PAG. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Did you look at the link I included? You refer to "controversial aspects of a BLP subject" and you refer to "questions about the article and how it addresses controversial topics". When you say "controversy", what are you referring to? Please be specific—what is the "controversy"? Bus stop (talk) 19:37, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I have posted a note on the article talk page. My reference was to your solicitation of personal views concerning Praeger's political opinions, some of which I believe are controversial. I am not going to take sides in this discussion and frankly it is not in anyone's interest for things to reach the point where I have to become involved in my capacity as an admin. However, I am going to make one observation. While I very much believe that you are a good and well intentioned editor, sometimes you don't know when to walk away from discussions or seek other opinions to help form consensus. I have also seen this at AfD. Your heart is in the right place, but now and then you can be like a dog with a bone. You need to learn when to let go. Speaking of which, that is what I am doing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I thank you for weighing in. Bus stop (talk) 20:26, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

• From the editor: Today's young adults don't know a world without Wikipedia

• Interview: 2018 Wikimedian of the Year, Farkhad Fatkullin

• News and notes: Flying high; low practice from Wikipedia 'cleansing' agency; where do our donations go? RfA sees a new trend

• In the media: Quicksilver AI writes articles

• Discussion report: Drafting an interface administrator policy

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Special report: Wikimania 2018

• Traffic report: Aretha dies – getting just 2,000 short of 5 million hits

• Technology report: Technical enhancements and a request to prioritize upcoming work

• Gallery: Leapfrog, historic Thai cave, and a rhythmic beat

• Recent research: Wehrmacht on Wikipedia, neural networks writing biographies

• Humour: Signpost editor censors herself

• Essay: Principle of Some Astonishment

• From the archives: Playing with Wikipedia words

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Memory hole

Hi Ad Orientem! Regarding your block here, it's clearly the same LTA as you blocked here. You mentioned "disruptive editing" as the reason for the new block, I just wasn't sure whether your remembered which LTA case the IP is connected to. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I did not. Thanks for the reminder. I may reblock with a more specific block summary. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I only realized it when I did a contribs check on the /24 range and saw the previously blocked account pop up.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:46, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I have extended this to an anon-only /24 range block. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:01, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Freebie

Alas, seems to think that calling me "extreme right wing" is not a "Personal Attack" and his original "anti-Semitic" words were not a personal attack either. I fear that he is quite likely to continue in this vein. I am especially amused by:

"t is abundantly clear that I did not say that the user was anti-semitic. I stated that there was mention of this on their talk page, and given their defence of Hitler, this was a concerning development that needed to be addressed."

Collect (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Indubitably58

Continued personal attacks, this time at you. Please block and remove TPA. Thanx - FlightTime (open channel) 18:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Nah. Editors are allowed a certain amount of latitude for venting on their own talk page. I've been called worse and everybody gets WP:CIVIL is important but in a community as big as ours you need to be able to shrug off petty stuff like this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:12, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz

Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

Amorymeltzer • Mr. Stradivarius • MusikAnimal • MSGJ • TheDJ • Xaosflux

Guideline and policy news

• Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

Technical news

• Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
• Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
• Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:22, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Dennis Prager#Quote from The Atlantic

Can you please see the above? There is no way for me to deal with this editor. This is supposed to involve collaborative editing in a WP:CIVIL environment? It is impossible. Every move I make results in a litigious response. See my Talk page: Misrepresenting other people, Edit war warning, Notice of discretionary sanctions, and Note - violating BLP and asking others to. Bus stop (talk) 00:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Bus stop I suggest you request a 3rd opinion or open a discussion at WP:DRN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cleveland, Texas

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cleveland, Texas. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Continued changes on Glima without citations

You added a warning to a user about his changes at Glima. He keeps adding uncited information anyway.--Óli Gneisti (talk) 10:47, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Issued level 3 warning. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:08, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. --Óli Gneisti (talk) 17:23, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like "CrunchyCookie" is now edit warring

Despite your talk page messages, looks like CrunchyCookie is now reverting everything, even edits that don't have anything to do with what they wanted to do on Muse discography: 1, 2, 3. I don't think they understand or are even willing to understand the basics of WP:BRD, WP:CONSENSUS—or even sourcing their edits. Maybe it requires you to intervene further, because I'm sure they're arrogant enough to continue reverting... Ss112 09:34, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Also, if you do, can you ask them to stop posting on my talk page? I'm really getting quite tired of telling them I don't care what they have to say, and they refuse to listen regardless. Ss112 09:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done He is a newbie and means well so try and cut him some slack. But yeah I do understand that it can get tiring. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Also, BlaccCrab is back using 71.179.82.143, editing his own created article Hopeless Romantic (Wiz Khalifa song). Edit summary is a dead giveaway. Ss112 17:31, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Blocked x 1 month. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:16, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

It continues: they've attempted to file an ArbCom case against me, and again posted at my talk page. This is a newbie horror story. Unrelated: would it be possible for you to to un-delete Believe (Lenny Kravitz song)? I want to see what was there before it was deleted and work on it by adding charts, certs and so on. Ss112 14:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Heh. I was busy this morning and am sorry that I missed this. Clearly it did not end well for them. I am not going to add salt to their wounds but hopefully they have now gotten the message. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

User:85.242.48.58

User keeps editing several articles disruptively. Is it time for a new block? SLBedit (talk) 20:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi SLBedit. Any diffs? I'm not seeing edits in the last 48 hrs so unless I'm missing something, any disruptive edits are likely to be stale. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:13, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

The IP is again removing sources from articles, e.g. S.L. Benfica (roller hockey), which has been locked three times already; the last time was due to 85.242.48.58. SLBedit (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Those edits are three days old, which makes them non-actionable. Additionally the IP was last blocked 9 months ago and there have been no warnings during the intervening period. So yeah this is stale. I will however post a warning on their talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:21, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

We need your input! Request for Comment - Including China's stance on Hamas

Your name was found on Feedback request service Politics, government, and law. Please join the discussion here and give your needed opinion on whether to include China's position concerning Hamas. Thanks! Veritycheck✔️ (talk) 16:29, 6 September 2018 (UTC)