Fluffernutter (talk | contribs) m Notice of discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (TW) |
→A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove message |
||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
== Notice == |
== Notice == |
||
[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship.2FPiotrus_3.E2.80.8E_edit_warring|Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship.2FPiotrus_3.E2.80.8E_edit_warring]]. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. [[User:Fluffernutter|A fluffernutter is a sandwich!]] ([[User talk:Fluffernutter|talk]]) 18:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC) |
[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship.2FPiotrus_3.E2.80.8E_edit_warring|Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship.2FPiotrus_3.E2.80.8E_edit_warring]]. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. [[User:Fluffernutter|A fluffernutter is a sandwich!]] ([[User talk:Fluffernutter|talk]]) 18:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC) |
||
== A barnstar for you! == |
|||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" |
|||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Civility Barnstar Hires.png|100px]] |
|||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Civility Barnstar''' |
|||
|- |
|||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I read your posts today and was impressed as always...best wishes. [[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 03:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
|} |
Revision as of 03:43, 12 February 2014
Template:Archive box collapsible
"Scope of the arbitration"
Hello Horologium. Re: AE Evidence Talk, could you please explain what you meant by your remark about being aware of the scope of the arbitration? What words of mine raised that concern? Thank.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SPECIFICO (talk • contribs) 21:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- Your "I wonder whether you are aware" opening is pretty condescending; I've been here for over 7 1/2 years (and have been an admin for almost 6). Since I referenced one of my comments from another arbitration in 2010, it's pretty safe to assume that I wouldn't be wading into an arbitration discussion without having some clue about the scope of the case (it's unlikely that someone who has participated in arbitration before would drop in without reading first). I felt like I was being lectured to as if I were a small and somewhat slow child. I may have over-reacted. Horologium (talk) 21:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I can't speak for SPECIFICO, but I know I acted overly-defensively and I apologize if I came across as rude or disrespectful. I am on edge because, in my view, a lot of false accusations have been against me by proponents of Misesian economics and its associated ideology. Your remarks contributed positively to the discussion, and I am glad that you corrected the few errors you did make. Steeletrap (talk) 21:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you read my words to be expressing condescension. Ironically I was trying to be polite and to avoid saying something too direct, such as "Please don't introduce a straw man example that personal accusations of racist views might be inserted in articles about Austrian economics." So, conceding what was apparently my poor choice of words, I still am concerned that (your caveat notwithstanding) readers might get the mistaken impression that such a thing was alleged to have occurred in the articles and behavior which are under review at Arbcom.
- On a different note, it's worth noting that many of the Wiki-notable individuals who are affiliated with the Mises Institute are not necessarily notable in the role of economist. Many of them have written more in the field of social and political theory. I have not been one to stress the "fringe" issue, because I don't think that the "fringe" tag is the most useful way to discuss sources, policy and content. Nonetheless, it remains the case that relatively few of the Mises Institute Fellows would be considered WP notable as academic economists, or for that matter as political theorists. I think that @Carolmooredc:, who apparently has little knowledge of mainstream thought in either area, genuinely does not understand that. If these individuals were notable, there would be an abundance of RS references available for their articles. Having spent a lot of time searching for such sources, I can tell you there are very few. Anyway, sorry for the mixup on your example and my response. SPECIFICO talk 23:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Deleting others' comments at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Piotrus 3
[1] Please don't. All assertions are supported by diffs. I've clicked about half the diffs and all reflected the assertions they support. If some of the assertions are not supported by their diffs, please point them out on the talk page. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship.2FPiotrus_3.E2.80.8E_edit_warring. Thank you. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Civility Barnstar | |
I read your posts today and was impressed as always...best wishes. MONGO 03:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC) |