User talk:Dreadstar/UTDEHA2

Archives and sandboxes

• Articles
• Awards received
• Dreadstar's Archives
• Dreadstar's Sandboxes

---

In recognition of your efforts on Wikipedia and for dedication to law oriented edits, I, Cdogsimmons, award you the Society Barnstar.

Defender

		The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		In recognition & thanks for your efforts in helping us work our way towards consensus towards making Battle of Washita River a good WP:NPOV (instead of WP:SOAP) article. Still a lotta work to do, but now we can do it, in no small part because of your help. Yksin 20:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

		The Fearless Blocker/Flame Extinguisher Barnstar
		In recognition & thanks for your efforts in toning down the rhetoric on Andalusian horse and standing up against harassment! Montanabw(talk) 23:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

M'Lord

M'Lord Dreadstar, we are most pleased to hear from you, for we have felt the loss of your companionship during our time of sickness. We hope that thou hast been well, and free of troubles, and eagerly await continued discourse, and your company. ~*Curtsey*~ Ariel♥Gold 20:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Content related to George Thomas Coker at Hearts and Minds (film)

You have never responded to the issues I had raised here on your talk page (since archived) and at Talk:Hearts and Minds (film) regarding your removal of relevant sourced content from the film article. I am seeking a detailed explanation for your removal of this content and the specific Wikipedia policies justifying removal of sourced content in the absence of any issue raised by any editor of the article other than yourself. While I would have hoped that you would have undone this removal yourself in good faith, no action has been taken. Before pursuing conflict resolution steps on the Coker article, I will be addressing issues with the film article first as there is you are the only other party to the conflict there. I look forward to obtaining this explanation, so that appropriate dispute resolution steps can be taken based on the the explanation provided. Alansohn (talk) 03:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I've already explained it to you in detail here. Dreadstar † 03:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have responded to all of the justifications proffered there, which you have not responded to. Nor have you addressed your repeated displays of bad faith and personal attacks in your screed there. I am still awaiting a legitimate policy explanation justifying removal of sourced content in a clearly relevant article before pursuing appropriate conflict resolution regarding your administrative actions. Alansohn (talk) 04:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

There are no personal attacks in my "screed", as you call it. I pointed out your violations of WP:POINT and WP:UNDUE and I asked you about your motivations regarding Coker because of your behavior in the matter. I blocked you for continuing to make uncivil personal attacks after being warned several times, then unblocked you in good faith after you emailed me promising to stop attacking other editors and find consensus for your proposed version; but I see you continue to make uncivil comments about other editors. I suggest you relax and have a cup of tea. If you believe I have acted inappropriately, then by by all means take it up the chain. Dreadstar † 05:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Your abusive and disruptive rant alleging violations of WP:POINT and other baseless complaints made there and elsewhere are clear personal attacks and textbook violations of WP:NPA. It is extremely difficult to understand how you can possibly point to a good faith constructive comment made to an editor violating WP:Deletion policy as "uncivil", while standing behind your rather shameless personal attacks at Talk:Hearts and Minds (film). Your removal of sourced content from the Hearts and Minds only appears to me as further bad faith on your part. As I do indeed believe you have acted inappropriately and as you have refused to address the specific issues raised by your bad faith personal attacks, pursuing administrative actions to address these issues would indeed seem to be the appropriate course of action. I shall do so over a cuppa tea. Alansohn (talk) 05:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Minor snark attack

Can you make the call if the user page for User:GaitedHorses is violating Wikipedia's no-commercial advertising standard? I am in a snark spat with this individual over a "breed" article that I merged into another (horse breeds project currently debating the "what IS a "breed" anyway?" question, I may back down on this one, maybe) but my main concern on the user page is commercial self-promotion. Some people don't get this bit, and given the fight I am having over merging Walkaloosa with another article on another spotted horse that is gaited, I'm getting frustrated. Thanks. Montanabw^(talk) 05:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)