Revision as of 18:53, 25 January 2014 editVolunteer Marek (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers94,167 edits →Decision regarding Murzyn← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:36, 25 January 2014 edit undoMalick78 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers8,516 edits →Decision regarding Murzyn: responseNext edit → | ||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
:Malick78, I would very much appreciate it if you stopped lying. If you stopped lying about me outing you, which I never did, and if you stopped lying about stuff that happened five years ago, stuff you weren't at all involved in (or were you? Either you're lying or you were involved but under a different username. These are the only possibilities). You are of course free to believe whatever fantasy pops into your head but you are not allowed to make these kinds of fantastical accusation without proof. Do not accuse me of outing you again. | :Malick78, I would very much appreciate it if you stopped lying. If you stopped lying about me outing you, which I never did, and if you stopped lying about stuff that happened five years ago, stuff you weren't at all involved in (or were you? Either you're lying or you were involved but under a different username. These are the only possibilities). You are of course free to believe whatever fantasy pops into your head but you are not allowed to make these kinds of fantastical accusation without proof. Do not accuse me of outing you again. | ||
:As to ''I can assure you there was no hounding of ''him'' by me'' - the fact that OTHER users had to instruct you to leave me alone belies that statement. And let's recall that you did in fact use your talk page to allow anonymous users who were harassing me in real life, to post all kinds of nonsense about me. In fact you were downright gleeful about it. There's very few things as disgusting and distasteful as when an abuser tries to play the role of the victim.] (]) 18:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC) | :As to ''I can assure you there was no hounding of ''him'' by me'' - the fact that OTHER users had to instruct you to leave me alone belies that statement. And let's recall that you did in fact use your talk page to allow anonymous users who were harassing me in real life, to post all kinds of nonsense about me. In fact you were downright gleeful about it. There's very few things as disgusting and distasteful as when an abuser tries to play the role of the victim.] (]) 18:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC) | ||
::Thanks for following me here VM, but let's not argue on someone else's page, especially in such a sordid manner. However, since I have been accused, I'll defend myself: you have been banned multiple times, I've never been banned in 7 years editing here. You were part of the EEML which got an article of mine deleted by tag-teaming and off-wiki collusion. You wasted my time. The article got reinstated however once the EEML was uncovered and I realised that you and Radeksz were one and the same and that I'd been had. Later, you went on to tell me not to use your talk page then immediately emailed me twice: I responded to the second email (stupidly, perhaps as was intended) and you got my name. Then two days later Staszek Lem wrote that he knew I wasn't Malick. He could have been Russian (I edit Russian pages), a dr (I edit medical murderers), someone interested in human rights... etc, but no - he was an editor of Polish pages like you. And you are the only person on WP who has ever received an email from me. It's hard not to assume the worst of someone who was banned for off-wiki collusion. Forgive me my natural human suspicion. I only mention it because I fear there are others like me and it might help them if any pattern should exist that can be identified. Kind regards, and sorry Adjwilley for wasting your space - ] (]) 19:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:36, 25 January 2014
Awilley — User talk — Contributions — Email |
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent edits, such as the ones to the page User:Adjwilley, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Misplaced Pages's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.
If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can write {{helpme}}
below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Misplaced Pages.
I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~
); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! ~Adjwilley (talk) 16:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
Request for third party comment
Hello Adjwilley, I was wondering if you can bring in a third-party view to the editing and discussion that is happening at Huqúqu'lláh and Talk:Huqúqu'lláh (and actually a lot on my own talk page, which I'm trying to get onto the talk page of the article). The discussion is on the use of primary source material, as well as the removal of views which have secondary source citations, with them being replaced with views which have no secondary source citations.
It would be helpful if there can be some other viewpoints brought into the discussion. Warm regards, -- 10:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- I will have a look at it. ~Adjwilley (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for commenting; can you keep the page and the discussion on your watch page for a while to see if you think my edits are heavy-handed or not. The anonymous editor is removing a well sourced sentence from secondary sources, with either his understanding of the primary source, and/or a statement that is not collaborated by the secondary sources. Warm regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 19:48, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, I've watchlisted the page. ~Adjwilley (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for commenting; can you keep the page and the discussion on your watch page for a while to see if you think my edits are heavy-handed or not. The anonymous editor is removing a well sourced sentence from secondary sources, with either his understanding of the primary source, and/or a statement that is not collaborated by the secondary sources. Warm regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 19:48, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Concern/query
Hello Adjwilley. I am concerned about this note Srich recently left on Carolmooredc's talk page:
This looks to me like Canvassing or Meatpuppetry with respect to the Arbcom request. Am I mistaken? Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 22:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not Adjwilley but I can address this: Yes, you are mistaken. Canvassing is trying to recruit likeminded editors to support one's side. Meatpuppetry is having another editor edit secretly on one's behalf and at one's direction, to avoid scrutiny of one's own edits. In the linked diff, SRich was expressing concern about the length of Carolmooredc's comments at the ArbCom request, and suggesting that she hold off on providing detailed diffs until the case is opened. There is no element of recruitment by SRich; Carolmooredc was already participating at that case request when the comment was made, so it cannot be canvassing. There is no element of secrecy or proxying either: the comment by SRich was made openly on Carolmooredc's talk page and was not couched in terms of doing anything on SRich's behalf, but rather a benign bit of advice that could have been offered by anyone. alanyst 23:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Well, we've also got this: in which @Carolmooredc: solicits @Binksternet: to consider adding certain diffs to his Arbcom statement. I'd hate to think that WP dispute resolution is about team play. SPECIFICO talk 23:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- So did Binksternet follow the supposed solicitation? No. Binksternet (talk) 02:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Well, we've also got this: in which @Carolmooredc: solicits @Binksternet: to consider adding certain diffs to his Arbcom statement. I'd hate to think that WP dispute resolution is about team play. SPECIFICO talk 23:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Alanyst. @Specifico, I pretty much concur with the above. Both look pretty much like people giving and receiving advice. I've made similar talk page edits many times myself. The second could potentially be read as a request to file a report, but it was just as much a request for advice and opinion, and I commented on the thread myself yesterday with my 2 cents. Either way I think that stirring this pot is probably not the most productive path forward. Thanks for dropping by. ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- It didn't even occur to me that that would be anything like canvassing. And I did add it myself when it became relevant. Mea culpa if it was bad. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 00:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- You're fine Carol, I wouldn't worry about it too much. It's good to be careful in situations like this, as it's easy to misinterpret others' intentions during a prolonged disagreement, but I understand your question was in good faith. ~Adjwilley (talk) 00:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- It didn't even occur to me that that would be anything like canvassing. And I did add it myself when it became relevant. Mea culpa if it was bad. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 00:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Decision regarding Murzyn
Hello, thank you for your comment regarding Murzyn and the problem there. I will try to get along with VM, but to be honest I've tried to steer clear of him over the last two years following (what I still claim was) his outing of me to another Polish editor, but he edits Murzyn, Racism in Poland, and other pages which I started so it is hard not to come into contact with him. I do feel hard done by his gaming of the system - telling me not to post on his page then emailing me (he did it twice, not once as he claimed). He was previously banned for off-wiki activity (the infamous EEML) so it would seem part of his MO, as would passing on my email address and name. Anyway, I can assure you there was no hounding of him by me. I was the one who almost left WP due to the unpleasant atmosphere. Regards, Malick78 (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for the note. I am on my phone right now so I won't be able to give a complete response, but I just wanted to say that I didn't mean to imply that you had actually hounded him, only that he may have felt that way. I am sorry for your experience as well ~Adjwilley (talk) 18:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- Malick78, I would very much appreciate it if you stopped lying. If you stopped lying about me outing you, which I never did, and if you stopped lying about stuff that happened five years ago, stuff you weren't at all involved in (or were you? Either you're lying or you were involved but under a different username. These are the only possibilities). You are of course free to believe whatever fantasy pops into your head but you are not allowed to make these kinds of fantastical accusation without proof. Do not accuse me of outing you again.
- As to I can assure you there was no hounding of him by me - the fact that OTHER users had to instruct you to leave me alone belies that statement. And let's recall that you did in fact use your talk page to allow anonymous users who were harassing me in real life, to post all kinds of nonsense about me. In fact you were downright gleeful about it. There's very few things as disgusting and distasteful as when an abuser tries to play the role of the victim.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for following me here VM, but let's not argue on someone else's page, especially in such a sordid manner. However, since I have been accused, I'll defend myself: you have been banned multiple times, I've never been banned in 7 years editing here. You were part of the EEML which got an article of mine deleted by tag-teaming and off-wiki collusion. You wasted my time. The article got reinstated however once the EEML was uncovered and I realised that you and Radeksz were one and the same and that I'd been had. Later, you went on to tell me not to use your talk page then immediately emailed me twice: I responded to the second email (stupidly, perhaps as was intended) and you got my name. Then two days later Staszek Lem wrote that he knew I wasn't Malick. He could have been Russian (I edit Russian pages), a dr (I edit medical murderers), someone interested in human rights... etc, but no - he was an editor of Polish pages like you. And you are the only person on WP who has ever received an email from me. It's hard not to assume the worst of someone who was banned for off-wiki collusion. Forgive me my natural human suspicion. I only mention it because I fear there are others like me and it might help them if any pattern should exist that can be identified. Kind regards, and sorry Adjwilley for wasting your space - Malick78 (talk) 19:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC)