thanks
for the correction. I don't know how that sneaky vandalism got by me. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 03:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- No problem!! That's what other eyes are for. It must be super hot on those articles at present. I initiated the protection of the Gaza Strip article, but that must be only the tip of the iceberg. Good luck--Slp1 (talk) 03:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Stephen Haggard
Keep up the good work! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Ayn Rand
Hi, I've filed an RfM on Ayn Rand, including as parties only those who've recently edited the article. However, as you've commented on talk, you might want to be involved too. If so, please add your name to the list of parties at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ayn Rand. Cheers, SlimVirgin talk|contribs 02:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Please do not revert an Arbitration Clerk acting in that role, especially as "vandalism". As the header of the page says, "# Arbitrators or Clerks may summarily remove or refactor discussion without comment." Daniel (talk) 03:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- What on earth are you talking about? If I have reverted any comments or discussion then it is totally a function of the software that I do not understand. I wrote a comment. I saved. Please WP:AGF and treat me accordingly.--Slp1 (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Slp1, everything OK? (I don't believe Slp1 would knowingly or willfully revert a clerk at ArbCom, and most likely hit the wrong button.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yep, that is what it looks like. No harm done, if anything it is a lesson learned. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 04:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I did assume good faith about whether it was an accident, by the way. If I wasn't assuming it, my response to your revert of my action as "vandalism" would have been a block, rather than simply the "Please don't..." message I left. Please assume the assumption of good faith. Daniel (talk) 04:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just for the record ... Slp1 is ever so quietly one of Wiki's finest editors, truly one that I hold in the highest esteem ... two warnings at once for what was most likely a wrong button can deliver an <ouch>. Just saying, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- So can having your edits, made in an official capacity on behalf of the Arbitration Committee, reverted as "vandalism" and then having the person who made the revert not even touch close to an apology — or even a recognition of fault, as the banner at the top of WP:TW suggests — when it is brought to their attention. Daniel (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Allrighty then, so much for my friendly attempt to de-escalate an unfortunate situation. I just thought you might not be aware of what a fine editor Slp1 is because they fly under the radar. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- And that matters in this situation because...? He is suddenly immune from being responsible for his editing because of it...? I was aware of his writing, having closely observed his role in the Learned Hand article, which was why I didn't go in swinging. However, the response generally has been rather...unsatisfactory. Daniel (talk) 04:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Especially as far as I am concerned I pushed no wrong button. I never called anybody's edits vandalism. I decided to comment arbcom case. I hit the edit button, I wrote my comment, I saved. What wrong button could I have pushed? I would be very grateful if someone could tell me. This is really putting off, frankly, as far as trying to help in these kinds of disputes. --Slp1 (talk) 04:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, you did. The edit summary here clearly states that you "identified" my edits as "vandalism" and reverted them because of it. So if you pushed no wrong button, are you saying you meant to do that? Daniel (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hm, that is a puzzler, seeing as you made this edit. By chance, do you have twinkle installed in your preferences? Tiptoety talk 04:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I do have Twinkle installed. And no, there is no way that I would (or did) revert anybody's edits on the arbcom page as vandalism. But yes, I have had trouble saving recently. I have to save constantly to have a comment stick. Is this the cause? I have no idea. But, there is some glitch in the software somewhere, for which I apologize, that made me look like I was reverting or claiming vandalism, or whatever, when all I was trying to do was encourage people to go to Mediation.--Slp1 (talk) 04:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hm, that is a puzzler, seeing as you made this edit. By chance, do you have twinkle installed in your preferences? Tiptoety talk 04:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, you did. The edit summary here clearly states that you "identified" my edits as "vandalism" and reverted them because of it. So if you pushed no wrong button, are you saying you meant to do that? Daniel (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Allrighty then, so much for my friendly attempt to de-escalate an unfortunate situation. I just thought you might not be aware of what a fine editor Slp1 is because they fly under the radar. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- So can having your edits, made in an official capacity on behalf of the Arbitration Committee, reverted as "vandalism" and then having the person who made the revert not even touch close to an apology — or even a recognition of fault, as the banner at the top of WP:TW suggests — when it is brought to their attention. Daniel (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
What really got me hooked into editing Wikipedia was the collegiality and helpfulness of editors, and the requirement for civility and assuming the best of people. It was so refreshing, and it was great fun editing with others to create excellent articles. But for whatever reason, the joy has gone out of it, and the above is the final straw.
I make a mistake (which I guess I did, though I have absolutely no recollection of even seeing the diff concerned, and as can be seen from the log I wasn't even active on WP at the time), and instead of "Did you mean to do this?" or "Maybe this was an error, but..." I get not one but two warnings, both assuming my edit was deliberate, and one talking about blocks. And it turns out that this was special treatment, and it was only because I had been observed working on a Featured Article, that one editor didn't really "go in swinging". Apparently not blocking me immediately was a sign of the assumption of good faith.
Well, in my mind AGF works out differently: all editors without a history of disruption- whether they've been "noticed" for FAs or not- are entitled to have possible errors pointed out by someone who is not swinging a bat. We all do make mistakes occasionally, no? Threatening blocks (or worse, blocking) when it is still unclear whether a behaviour is deliberate is inappropriate and hardly deescalates the situation or minimizes drama.
This is a very minor issue. I am not blameless. But the difference between the friendliness I first enjoyed on Wikipedia and the actions and attitudes expressed here (by admins representing arbcom, no less) is just too jarring. There have been other disappointments, but this is the one that has popped the balloon. Time to get a new hobby. --Slp1 (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Slp1, I'm very sorry to see this. Usually when an editor feels the need to leave or take a break, I encourage that they do so and don't try to talk them back; this is a different circumstance, and I hope this can be sorted. Losing you would be a huge loss. I am going to ask around to see who might know what caused that to happen with the automated tools. I don't use any of those tools (I'm afraid of them for reasons just like this), but I know people I can ask. The overreaction to a simple mistake that occurred here is most troubling; I hope you will reconsider, come back refreshed, and please feel free to e-mail me if I can be of any help. All the best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- For what its worth Slp1... I think I know how you feel. I started editing in late 2004 or early 2005 as an IP - and with few exceptions I had the time of my life with wonderful fellow editors who treated me very well. Later, I ended up taking a sudden break in February 2006 and came back just a few months ago - and wow have things changed. My first few weeks back were frustrating, I felt I had left a very different wikipedia than I had come back to. In many ways it is - but in some ways it isn't. We're still all volunteers, and 99% of the time, things are ridiculous because we all care so much. I'm not in any position to tell you to leave or not to leave - but my recommendation is to sleep on it. There are still beautiful things about this place - and wonderful people too.--Tznkai (talk) 02:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- I am sorry to see you go, but wish you all the best in whatever you do. If you do ever decide to return, I for one will be very glad to welcome you back too. Peace be with you, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Slp1, please do not go. After looking back at my own actions the warning I gave may have been a bit harsh but at the time I assumed that as a administrator you knew what you were doing and deliberately made the vandalism revert, I agree that was a assumption of bad faith on my part. I want to offer my apology for my original statement, and continue my last statement by offering to try and get to the bottom of why it says you made that edit when you clearly state you do not. Understand that after you stated you did not recall making that edit, I backed down and did my best to assume good faith, clearly I failed. I ask that you do not take this so harsh, and simply ignore myself and Daniel and move on. This incident is nothing compared to all the great work you have done for the project, and I would hate to have it be the reason you decided to stop contributing. As always, my talk page and email are open if you want to talk. See you around (*hint, hint*) Tiptoety talk 04:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- I am sorry to see you go, but wish you all the best in whatever you do. If you do ever decide to return, I for one will be very glad to welcome you back too. Peace be with you, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- For what its worth Slp1... I think I know how you feel. I started editing in late 2004 or early 2005 as an IP - and with few exceptions I had the time of my life with wonderful fellow editors who treated me very well. Later, I ended up taking a sudden break in February 2006 and came back just a few months ago - and wow have things changed. My first few weeks back were frustrating, I felt I had left a very different wikipedia than I had come back to. In many ways it is - but in some ways it isn't. We're still all volunteers, and 99% of the time, things are ridiculous because we all care so much. I'm not in any position to tell you to leave or not to leave - but my recommendation is to sleep on it. There are still beautiful things about this place - and wonderful people too.--Tznkai (talk) 02:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Dear wonderful colleague, please stay with us. The encyclopedia is a better place for having you around; I loved working with you on Learned Hand and hoped to do so again in the future on something else. I was once accused of being a sockpuppet in a similar situation, which was quite bewildering (I think aol members share ip numbers or something). In my opinion, arbitration pages and the like are hotbeds of aggression and people march up and down in defensive mode, jumping to conclusions. Things go at a slower and more thoughtful pace on the average article, and I'm certain that you will continue to find on many pages the collegiality you enjoy and represent. Please change your mind. Some people here think the world of you, you know.qp10qp (talk) 22:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to all for posting, encouraging, suggesting, and explaining. It means a lot to me that editors took the trouble, and has made a difference. Maybe the gulf isn't as wide as I feared: I certainly hope that this is the case. For my part, I am sorry for my entirely unintended edit, however it came to be.
I think I still need to take a break, but hope, like Christopher Robin, to be backson. There's all that research I did over the Christmas holidays that should be put to use somewhere! --Slp1 (talk) 20:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Great great news!!!!! (dances round garden in kilt playing the balalaika) qp10qp (talk) 20:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Dancing, too ... glad to see you editing ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)