| Revision as of 02:05, 25 February 2008 editCrum375 (talk | contribs)Administrators23,961 edits →BLP violation: re← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:14, 25 February 2008 edit undoNewbyguesses (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,860 editsm →BLP violation: see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive371#User Crum meat puppeting at LAYOUTNext edit → | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| ::'''note to ]''', I dont think it is a good idea for yourself to unilaterally remove, <!-- or seek to threaten users about this --> all examples of what you term "BLP violations" from evidence pages of ]. You may have an incorrect grasp of the relevant policies, despite your and ]'s attempts to re=write BLP policy as a tag-team. see ]. | ::'''note to ]''', I dont think it is a good idea for yourself to unilaterally remove, <!-- or seek to threaten users about this --> all examples of what you term "BLP violations" from evidence pages of ]. You may have an incorrect grasp of the relevant policies, despite your and ]'s attempts to re=write BLP policy as a tag-team. see <!-- ] --> ] <!-- has been archived?. --> | ||
| ::At the RfAr/Mantanmoreland, might I strongly suggest that you leave such matters to the Arbitrators. | ::At the RfAr/Mantanmoreland, might I strongly suggest that you leave such matters to the Arbitrators. | ||
| ::You ought not to insult the arbs, and the forum by repeating the actions you took which led to /Evidence being protected. You exceeded 3RR, and went against a strong consensus of editors who have been more involved than you, and SlimVirgin, in the AfAr/Mantanmoreland. Your edits there could be considered as ], and you could be blocked. I am not an admin, and I resent your attempts to impose your will upon this forum, as if you have some special power not available to ordinary editors. | ::You ought not to insult the arbs, and the forum by repeating the actions you took which led to /Evidence being protected. You exceeded 3RR, and went against a strong consensus of editors who have been more involved than you, and SlimVirgin, in the AfAr/Mantanmoreland. Your edits there could be considered as ], and you could be blocked. I am not an admin, and I resent your attempts to impose your will upon this forum, as if you have some special power not available to ordinary editors. | ||
Revision as of 02:14, 25 February 2008
Username policy
Based on an edit you have made to Jimbo Wales' talk page, it would appear that you are claiming to be Patrick M. Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com. If you choose to edit under the username of a well-known living person (which you are), it is required that you either disclose that you are not the same person, or provide proof that you are. You may wish to read the relevant policy to avoid being blocked. Thank you! - Chardish (talk) 05:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Patrick has kindly confirmed to OTRS that it is really him that is editing wikipedia. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the professional way this was handled. Respect, PatrickByrne (talk) 01:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Welcome To Misplaced Pages!
Welcome!
Hello, PatrickByrne, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Acalamari 19:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
From the RfC
You took back your comment before I finished typing up my reply, Patrick, but since I typed it up, let me just give my two cents on the issue. Here's what I would have posted:
- First of all, Patrick I did a bit of formatting to seperate our statements, hope you don't mind. Let me put my .02 in. I think the best outcome possible is that it's conclusively proven one way or the other. That these people are related, or they are not related. Jimbo understands there's a need for this investigation, the so-called "deep digging" because if we don't get the bottom to it, it'll just fester again and again.
- As for the line that the best possible outcome being that the charges are not true.. well.. when you consider the amount of disruption that proving a match (especially if there's a link to a supposed RL identity).. if I was responsible for Misplaced Pages, I'd hope there's not a match too. Ever hear the phrase "Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst?" SirFozzie (talk) 21:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok SirFozzie. No worries on the formatting. I am a newbie here and am cognizant that I am probably violating various Wiki-etiquettes, though I try not to do so.
A suggestion
Regarding the evidence or statement you are preparing for the mantanmoreland Rfar, I would recommend staying away from email communications being posted to the page. Rather explain your position and what the evidence shows and email the actual evidence (if it's emails or other normally "private" communications). One of the reasons this problem has festered (IMO) is that the problems have not been brought to light in a way that the community generally finds respectful of user privacy. Whether that is right or wrong is another issue. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 03:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Rocksanddirt, Well, many people feel violated in many ways, I'm sure. I can follow your advice, but if I do that some people are going to say they do not know whether to believe the emails say what I say they do. In any case, what do you mean by saying, "email the actual evidence"? To whom or what should I email it? SlimVirgin and Jimbo? No thanks.PatrickByrne (talk) 06:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- To an arbitrator of your choice? User:Dorftrottel 06:47, February 18, 2008
- Actually, to the whole committee (and assorted hangers-on), via arbcom-l
wikimedia.org would probably be a better way to go about it than emailing individual arbitrators. —Random832 16:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion. I took it, and sent the ArbCom something. I also added something to the arbitration page (just a link to ).PatrickByrne (talk) 01:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
BLP violation
Patrick, I am taking no sides in this dispute. For all I care, GW could be a villain or a saint, but this is not the place to argue the issue. WP is built on linking to or referencing reliable sources, and not as extension to users' own blogs. Once you have links to reliable sources (such as mainstream media) publishing your allegations, we'll be glad to include them in Wikiepdia. Until then, they'll have to remain on your blog, unlinked from here as long as they violate WP:BLP. Thanks for your understanding, Crum375 (talk) 17:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- Um... Isn't an arbcom case specifically about the accounts accused of being his sockpuppets kind of precisely the place to argue the issue? It's not like he tried to link it in article space. —Random832 18:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please read WP:BLP. Removing BLP violations applies to anywhere on Misplaced Pages. ArbCom material that may violate privacy or BLP may be forwarded to them via email. Crum375 (talk) 18:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- I notice that Gary's blog has been quoted from, although it has about 1/100 the traffic of mine. In addition, "Once you have links to reliable sources (such as mainstream media) publishing your allegations, we'll be glad to include them in Misplaced Pages" rather misses the point of my argument, that Misplaced Pages's capture by vested financial interests largely prevents mainstream media from publishing the allegations. See the circularity? PatrickByrne (talk) 06:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- If WP is " by vested financial interests," then that should be a good enough story by itself for the mainstream media. Crum375 (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Not if no evidence of it can be posted within Misplaced Pages to disrupt its hermetically-sealed version of Truth, nor that which isposteed outside Misplaced Pages cannot be linked to from within Misplaced Pages.PatrickByrne (talk) 01:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- So if no evidence of wrongdoing can be posted on the Mob Weekly, the FBI and the media can just ignore them? Crum375 (talk) 02:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- Not if no evidence of it can be posted within Misplaced Pages to disrupt its hermetically-sealed version of Truth, nor that which isposteed outside Misplaced Pages cannot be linked to from within Misplaced Pages.PatrickByrne (talk) 01:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- If WP is " by vested financial interests," then that should be a good enough story by itself for the mainstream media. Crum375 (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- I notice that Gary's blog has been quoted from, although it has about 1/100 the traffic of mine. In addition, "Once you have links to reliable sources (such as mainstream media) publishing your allegations, we'll be glad to include them in Misplaced Pages" rather misses the point of my argument, that Misplaced Pages's capture by vested financial interests largely prevents mainstream media from publishing the allegations. See the circularity? PatrickByrne (talk) 06:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please read WP:BLP. Removing BLP violations applies to anywhere on Misplaced Pages. ArbCom material that may violate privacy or BLP may be forwarded to them via email. Crum375 (talk) 18:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- note to User:Crum375, I dont think it is a good idea for yourself to unilaterally remove, all examples of what you term "BLP violations" from evidence pages of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland. You may have an incorrect grasp of the relevant policies, despite your and SlimVirgin's attempts to re=write BLP policy as a tag-team. see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive371#User Crum meat puppeting at LAYOUT
- At the RfAr/Mantanmoreland, might I strongly suggest that you leave such matters to the Arbitrators.
- You ought not to insult the arbs, and the forum by repeating the actions you took which led to /Evidence being protected. You exceeded 3RR, and went against a strong consensus of editors who have been more involved than you, and SlimVirgin, in the AfAr/Mantanmoreland. Your edits there could be considered as vandalism, and you could be blocked. I am not an admin, and I resent your attempts to impose your will upon this forum, as if you have some special power not available to ordinary editors.
- I repeat, you have insulted the arbitrators, in my opinion, and your actions were insulting to the respected editors who tried to reign you in. With respect, consider your position,it might be perilous. And Just Stop it. Newbyguesses (talk · contribs) 02:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Arbitration
Hi Patrick: As someone who agrees with some of your concerns with the way Misplaced Pages has handled this, let me just say I believe it is consistent with standard principles for the site to allow a link to your story, but not to allow the substance itself on Misplaced Pages. This derives from our policy on biographies of living persons, which generally requires very strict sourcing for negative statements about living people (I understand this has not always been upheld in your case, something I consider a problem). All the same, the link has received some attention, so I wouldn't be concerned that it has been overlooked. Just a thought from one editor. Regards, Mackan79 (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Mackan,: point taken and respected. Live and learn. I am new here and, believe it or not, am not trying to hurt anyone, nor violate Wiki-etiquette. I now understand your point.