User talk:Buster7: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 03:01, 6 December 2009

Wikipedia:ARS/Tagged

Archives

Template:Multicol 2008
March
April
May
June
August
September
October
November
December
2009
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Template:Multicol-break Template:Multicol-end

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by .

the pen

[scare tactics} [1] pssst!... [2] who?... [3] MaFa2... [4] sock/civ... [5] pirahna... [6] template... [7] The 100... [8] eye-on 'r and... [9] Hidden Ball Trick... [10] Time Bandit... [11] hiway... [12] folks... [13] Genesis [14] Paid ops... [15] exert... [16] Tito [17] instr... [18] bravo... [19] reminder... [20] Red hair... [21] Onion... [22] they... [23] lotsa rules... [24] A/R/E #40... [25] Lauel and Hardy... [26] ACPD... [27] Draft... [28] wub's him wong... [29] Hunt... [30] com/stand... [31] Ruby... [32] incivility... [33] what is... [34] tao... [35] big boy pool... [36] Bacchus... [37] Ramadan... [38] Yom Kippur... [39] Cabal... [40] wikihounding... [41] Don't bold Gale

Public Storage

WP:Civility Poll/mid-2009

This page in a nutshell: A poll [[42]] was held to gather consensus on how the community feels about the civility policy. The results of the poll are that the majority of people feel the current civility policy is too lenient, and that it is inconsistently applied and unenforceable. Most people feel that civil behaviour applies as much on personal talkpages as elsewhere, and that there are particular problems with civil behaviour on Recent Changes Patrol and Admin Noticeboards. Almost everyone feels we are too harsh on new users, though just over half the people feel that when it comes to experienced users that expectations of behaviour depends on context and the people involved. Most people feel that baiting is under-recognised, although it was noted that it is difficult to recognise baiting, and that people have a choice in how they respond. There was no clear consensus on the use of warnings before blocking, though most feel that the warnings are about right. A number of people feel that everyone should be treated with respect regardless of circumstances, and that being civil does not impede communication. A number of people also feel that experts should be treated like everyone else.

quote

This project does not exist to help editors grow a thicker skin. Our mission is to build an encyclopedia, not establish limits for low-level abuse that we think our volunteer editors should be willing to suffer. If we drive away more people than we attract, then it's a genuine loss to the project and we should fix it rather than label those who would prefer to work in a civil environment as "thin skinned." -- User:Cool Hand Luke [2]

User:AxG/WikiWelcome1

Hello

your message was rather odd. :) hope you are doing well. Good to hear from you. I have your talk page on my list, being watching what you have been doing for a while.Ikip (talk) 20:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Watch this space!

Please "hold your fire". What I would appreciate is your observation of the conduct of discussion in this case.

I anticipate there will be multiple opportunities for you to get involved.

It is sometimes wise, for their own sake, to give people enough rope to hang themselves.

You have seen how I have acted in good faith: people challenge Goldberg on patriarchy, so I source material on him.

They challenge him, so I source material on his other books and on Hakim.

Then people attempt attempt to hide via redirects etc, etc, anything that could support Goldberg on patriarchy.

It's only a few people, and they use the technique of shooting the messenger, rather than finding alternative PsOV.

Very unfriendly, very not Wiki.

I have plenty of time, I've recently been published in the US, and I have legal advice for here and there.

I don't want this to blow up in the face of our wonderful project.

When the time is right, helping people to keep things in proportion is what you do best.

There are some cool and wise heads at Wiki, let's see if they triumph this time. I hope so. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 03:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 96: / Line 96: @@
 ==Hello==
 your message was rather odd. :) hope you are doing well. Good to hear from you. I have your talk page on my list, being watching what you have been doing for a while.[[User:Ikip|Ikip]] ([[User talk:Ikip|talk]]) 20:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
+==FYI==
+* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Request_concerning_Alastair_Haines|Watch this space!]]
+:Please "hold your fire". What I would appreciate is your observation of the conduct of discussion in this case.
+:I anticipate there will be multiple opportunities for you to get involved.
+:It is sometimes wise, for their own sake, to give people enough rope to hang themselves.
+:You have seen how I have acted in good faith: people challenge Goldberg on patriarchy, so I source material on him.
+:They challenge him, so I source material on his other books and on Hakim.
+:Then people attempt attempt to hide via redirects etc, etc, anything that could support Goldberg on patriarchy.
+:It's only a few people, and they use the technique of shooting the messenger, rather than finding alternative PsOV.
+:Very unfriendly, very not Wiki.
+:I have plenty of time, I've recently been published in the US, and I have legal advice for here and there.
+:I don't want this to blow up in the face of our wonderful project.
+:When the time is right, helping people to keep things in proportion is what you do best.
+:There are some cool and wise heads at Wiki, let's see if they triumph this time. I hope so. :) [[User:Alastair Haines|Alastair Haines]] ([[User talk:Alastair Haines|talk]]) 03:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)