User talk:Kafziel
Note: This page is sometimes semi-protected. If you are an IP editor or have a new account, it's possible you won't be able to post a message on this talk page.
Please try this talk page first. But, if it's protected, you can leave me a message at User talk:Kafziel/Unprotected. I'll respond to good faith questions/comments as soon as I can. Thanks, and sorry for the trouble.
Please try this talk page first. But, if it's protected, you can leave me a message at User talk:Kafziel/Unprotected. I'll respond to good faith questions/comments as soon as I can. Thanks, and sorry for the trouble.
Regarding that IP block
You blocked IP 184.20.209.241 (talk · contribs) yesterday, but it appears that with the block gone, he's back at my talk page with the same nonsense (see [1]). I dunno if you feel right in blocking him again, or if I should go back to AN where I initially posted for help. --MASEM (t) 23:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, I was out of town yesterday. Looks like Starblind took care of it. Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 13:37, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Requests for Comment
When did it become unacceptable to compile requests for comment on other editor's tendentious behaviour? Please point to the Wikipedia policy that says that I cannot do ti. I can the find the policy that says I can. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- I already pointed to it: WP:ATTACK. Specifically, keeping a "list of enemies" or "list of everything bad user:XXX did" on your user space is neither constructive nor appropriate. I notice you didn't have a problem when it was that other user's page... is it not fair to apply it evenly on both sides? Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- Another user I B Wright had already raised an ANI on that very list where its existence was upheld. Although I did contribute to the ANI, I accepted the admin's opinion that it was acceptable. What has changed? DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:54, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of that, and I can't speak to other users' points of view. The page has been there for months and months, with no actual RfC to speak of. You can't just have a page where you indefinitely compile grievances against other editors for the purpose of harassing them at some point in the future. If you really feel the need to do that, you can save it on your own computer. I would be willing to email you the deleted contents, with the agreement that you not use them to create a page like that again. But it would be better just to move on. Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 18:13, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- Another user I B Wright had already raised an ANI on that very list where its existence was upheld. Although I did contribute to the ANI, I accepted the admin's opinion that it was acceptable. What has changed? DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:54, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- Well the problem there was that I was just getting ready to finalise the RfC, when another user raised an ANI over the subject behaviour (which was upheld and a one week block imposed). This puts the skids on any RfC, because the ultimate aim is that Wtshymanski follows the rules and edits in accordance with concensus. I have to assume WP:AGF that Wtshymanski will respond to the censure and behave himself in future. Time had not elapsed enough for that to deliver one way or the other. The RfC was on hold, but evidence was that it was not so for long. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 22:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- Since we are messing up this poor guy's page. :) As I tried to help you with last fall? you need to mind your Ps and Qs with your flippant snarky comments about the person you are building a case against. As I indicated it could end up backfiring on you. I was trying to help you. Then your daddy figure mentor gets in there and warns you that you have been insulted and shouldn't take that behavior towards yourself and that I am protecting the person by attacking you. Next thing you know you are lodging complaints about my trying to formalize a consensus, at the request of an admin (that became invisible and hung me out to dry during the process), to stop the editwarring on an article. You throw insults around, threaten me and next thing you know we have complaints at ANI aqainst each other. It's gone from bad to worse all over a simple misunderstanding, in the first place. You and your daddy editor always have several IPs that show up to agree with you on talk pages and the first sign of content dispute with either of you, the other shows up to support arguments, always in favour and if it continues then IP editors with usually less than 10 edits jump in to stir the pot and then never edit again. Now I have tried to address this with you, brought it up at the most useless WP page going, ANI, and now I am here asking you to stop this behavior and IP hopping nonsense. Log in! Content discussions cannot be trusted, anymore, by me and obviously Wtshymanski, although he will not come forward after he was beaten into submission in the last gangwar. (yeah he is a sarcastic SOB) I don't want to hear about how you forgot to sign in ONCE or how DNS works different than North America (it doesn't). They are not excuses for sockpuppetry support in content disputes. Kafziel, sorry about this here. 174.118.142.187 (talk) 03:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know if this is your field but could you have a look at [2] and perhaps close it or something as the whole thing has just broken down into what appears nothing less than trolling/provocation of other editors with some collapsing comments from others. It's looks fairly arrogant and gutsy to me. Thanks. 174.118.142.187 (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2013 (UTC)