| Revision as of 02:25, 28 December 2013 editDarkness Shines (talk | contribs)31,762 edits ←Replaced content with '{{User:Darkness Shines/Topicon}}'← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:19, 30 December 2013 edit undoA Quest For Knowledge (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers24,191 edits →6RR: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{User:Darkness Shines/Topicon}} | {{User:Darkness Shines/Topicon}} | ||
| == ARBCC and DS applies to "List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming" == | |||
| As you probably know, climate change articles fall under ] which explicitly bars battlegrounding and edit warring. ] applies to ] and its talk page. Your edit warring as a Plan B to a 6th AFD going through seems problematic. ] (]) 18:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :Yawn. Everything on Misplaced Pages falls under something or other, removing BLP vios is an exemption to 3RR, but you posting this here certainly shows a battleground mentality on your part. ] (]) 18:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::...Is an exemption, but right where it mentions the exemption: "Editors who find themselves in edit wars over potentially defamatory material about living persons should consider raising the matter at the BLP noticeboard instead of relying on the exemption." WP operates by consensus first and foremost. Whether this is a BLP issue has been debated. It's worth continuing to debate, but policy is not on your side as consensus is there is no BLP issue here. Otherwise anybody could delete any BLP text they want just because they ''say'' it's a BLP issue. --— <tt>] <sup style="font-size:80%;">]</sup></tt> | 19:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == 6RR == | |||
| You're at 6RR if my count is correct. | |||
| BLP is not a shield or excuse for ] and ]y behavior. This is a heavely scrutinized article. Dozens, if not hundreds, of editors have examined this page and did not find a BLP violation. I suggest you stop now before you're blocked and/or topic-banned. ] (]) 19:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:19, 30 December 2013
ARBCC and DS applies to "List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming"
As you probably know, climate change articles fall under WP:ARBCC which explicitly bars battlegrounding and edit warring. WP:DS applies to List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming and its talk page. Your edit warring as a Plan B to a 6th AFD going through seems problematic. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yawn. Everything on Misplaced Pages falls under something or other, removing BLP vios is an exemption to 3RR, but you posting this here certainly shows a battleground mentality on your part. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- ...Is an exemption, but right where it mentions the exemption: "Editors who find themselves in edit wars over potentially defamatory material about living persons should consider raising the matter at the BLP noticeboard instead of relying on the exemption." WP operates by consensus first and foremost. Whether this is a BLP issue has been debated. It's worth continuing to debate, but policy is not on your side as consensus is there is no BLP issue here. Otherwise anybody could delete any BLP text they want just because they say it's a BLP issue. --— Rhododendrites | 19:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
6RR
You're at 6RR if my count is correct. BLP is not a shield or excuse for WP:Disruptive and WP:POINTy behavior. This is a heavely scrutinized article. Dozens, if not hundreds, of editors have examined this page and did not find a BLP violation. I suggest you stop now before you're blocked and/or topic-banned. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)