User talk:SchuminWeb
It's hard to say goodbye to a community that I have been a part of for seven years. During my time as a contributor to Wikipedia, I have grown tremendously as a writer, and have added in many ways, large and small, to countless numbers of articles, and have participated in countless numbers of discussions. However, I have come to realize within the past year that I have reached both the limits of what I can accomplish within the Wikipedia community, and also the limits of my patience in interacting with other members of the Wikipedia community. Thus I feel that it is time for me to move on.
While I still believe in Wikipedia's mission to amass the sum of all human knowledge, I fear that the project may fail because the community will, over time, destroy itself due to what I perceive as constant infighting, the holding of long-term grudges by many users, and general rudeness and incivility on the part of many, which has an alienating effect on other users, both new and seasoned. As an administrator, I received more abuse than I would ever wish on anyone that is doing volunteer work, and this often extended beyond Wikipedia to my website, my Facebook, my Twitter, and my personal email, despite my best efforts to direct all Wikipedia-related inquiries back to Wikipedia. Because of this, I was never really able to escape from Wikipedia, even when using it for research, and it took a toll on me, turning what might otherwise have been an enjoyable activity into a chore, causing me to dread seeing the orange "You have new messages" bar come up, because it inevitably meant having to listen to more whining.
I soon found it increasingly difficult for me to justify to myself why I was still doing volunteer work for a project that I no longer found enjoyable. When I logged out of Wikipedia by choice and left it logged out, I soon came to realize that by not participating in Wikipedia, my stress levels went down, and I generally found myself to be much happier.
I believe that my best days are still ahead of me, but now it is time for me to forge my own path, endeavoring in new works and projects separate from those of the Wikipedia community. I wish all of you the best in your future endeavors, and perhaps our paths will cross again some day. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:49, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Policy WP:NFCC
I disagree with your misunderstanding of my dispute with Koavf's multiple deeply flawed nominations.
- "Decorative" is not a valid deletion reason, because it is not mentioned or implied in policy. Don't say it is, it isn't. WMF brought the hammer down, and I insist that policy be quoted, not misquoted, and applied as text, not as interpreted text.
- The nominator ignored where the scene depicted or the contents of the scene were critically discussed, and so did you. Those noms were wrong, were answered, and those answers should have been respected.
- Nominator falsifies policy: "not critical for understanding", "greatly enhance" and "greatly decrease" are not stated in policy. Misleading about policy while attempting to enforce it really is egregiously bad form. Why pretend it's okay, when it's not?
These were not "attacks on an editor". WP:SPADE - they are attacks on the corruption and dilution of policy text. Policy states "important", nom corrupted this to "critical". Policy states "significantly" - nom corrupted this to "greatly". Such distortions should not be allowed to stand, especially where the correct interpretation of the policy has legal consequences.
I would appreciate it if you would remove or strike your assertion of attack-on-editor. I'm very careful with my language. You're free to assert that I attacked, just not an editor. I have supported Koavf in the past (with provisos). This campaign was too flawed to permit to stand unanswered. --Lexein (talk) 01:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- It was an attack on another editor, and not related to the content of the image at hand. Not a personal attack of the type that is prohibited at WP:NPA, but nonetheless an attack on an editor's judgment. I will not strike any portion of my comments. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- Attacking the language of a nomination cannot be interpreted as an attack on an editor. Am I to understand that you, as an administrator, are willing to allow falsifications and distortions of policy language to stand? That's not good. Not good at all. --Lexein (talk) 01:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- Followup: in case it wasn't obvious, WP:Deletion review/Log/2012 November 25. --Lexein (talk) 16:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Template:Non-free fair use in listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Non-free fair use in. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Non-free fair use in redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Template:Gentlemen Prefer Blondes
You deleted Template:Gentlemen Prefer Blondes with the explanation that it was T3: Unused, redundant template. It was neither unused nor redundant. Please explain yourself.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- I see you have come by to respond to your talk page without responding to this. What is up?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
What the heck are you doing?
How could you close Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_November_17#File:Bart_to_the_Future.png as Delete? It doesn't make any sense. Unless you restore the image I'm going to do it myself. Theleftorium (talk) 10:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_November_17#File:Andy checking phone on stage.jpg for a discussion of most of the deletions on this page, including that one. Bottom line is that these screenshots are in fact decorative as they are used on the articles, and therefore are not permitted. I am not going to restore the image. You shouldn't, either without taking it to DRV, because I made a decision to close a large number of deletion discussions as delete that I knew would be unpopular because they're about people's precious television shows, and I'm standing by myu close. SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:09, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- Ridiculous. This image isn't like the others, it is not used as decoration as some of the other Simpsons images are. If you read the comments at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2012_November_17#File:Bart_to_the_Future.png you would see that. I'm restoring the image now. Theleftorium (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Template:Outedent Just to let you know This deletion has been posted for discussion here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention Ottawahitech (talk) 19:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi SchuminWeb, on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 November 17#File:Jmol of 2 bromobutyric acid.png, I made a case for the file being free, you deleted it, citing the discussion in the log. I'm just pinging you to hear your opinion on why my rationale was incorrect. No need to {{tb}} me, I will watch this page. Regards, Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 10:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
