Sizzle Flambé (talk | contribs) →(Talk:) Triple Goddess: new section |
CorbieVreccan (talk | contribs) →(Talk:) Triple Goddess: As long as it's named for what it is, I don't really care. But not all Pagan, Heathen or Neopagan traditions have MMC as part of their belief system. |
||
(10 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 199: | Line 199: | ||
:Ah, thanks; I missed that. Looking into it now. - <font face="comic sans ms"><b>[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:#009">Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]]</b> [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 21:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC) |
:Ah, thanks; I missed that. Looking into it now. - <font face="comic sans ms"><b>[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:#009">Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]]</b> [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 21:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
::It may be because at least at some point, the IP address was warned for edits, but that was long ago. I know my IP is dynamic, so I thought I'd mention it. You're right, there are a lot of fringe people who pop up on the JM article - I used to hope he wasn't dead. Then again, there are the people who think Paul McCartney ''is'' dead. Interesting life, eh? [[User:Wildhartlivie|Wildhartlivie]] ([[User talk:Wildhartlivie|talk]]) 21:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC) |
::It may be because at least at some point, the IP address was warned for edits, but that was long ago. I know my IP is dynamic, so I thought I'd mention it. You're right, there are a lot of fringe people who pop up on the JM article - I used to hope he wasn't dead. Then again, there are the people who think Paul McCartney ''is'' dead. Interesting life, eh? [[User:Wildhartlivie|Wildhartlivie]] ([[User talk:Wildhartlivie|talk]]) 21:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:... You mean McCartney's not dead? *snerk* <small>''Pray for the health of Ringo''</small>, - <font face="comic sans ms"><b>[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:#009">Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]]</b> [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 18:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== (Talk:) Triple Goddess == |
== (Talk:) Triple Goddess == |
||
In case it's of interest to you, I've added documentation in [[Talk:Triple_Goddess#.27Single_article.27_approach|the Talk page's last section]] (it's now very long). <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 22:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)</small> |
In case it's of interest to you, I've added documentation in [[Talk:Triple_Goddess#.27Single_article.27_approach|the Talk page's last section]] (it's now very long). <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 22:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)</small> |
||
:I'll take a look at it when I get a chance. Thanks. I appreciate more eyes on this situation :-) - <font face="comic sans ms"><b>[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:#009">Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]]</b> [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 21:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Well, after long looooong discussion on the talk page, and having addressed the only two "citation needed"s that anyone came up with, I finally added text to [[Triple Goddess]], much of it restored from just before [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Triple_Goddess&diff=prev&oldid=261896701 that edit you noted earlier]. It was immediately [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Triple_Goddess&diff=315883691&oldid=315863418 undone.] I'd appreciate your opinion on the matter, in case I'm misreading the situation. Has this become a case of [[WP:OWN]] and [[WP:TEND]]? <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 11:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:Yes. {{User5|Davemon}} is not collaborating with other editors. His tactic has been to wear others down with verbose, and at times surreal, [[WP:Wikilawyering]] on the talk page and [[WP:TEND|tendentious]] editing. |
|||
:Specific points of [[Wikipedia:Wikilawyering]] we are seeing here: |
|||
{{cquote|2. Abiding by the letter of a [[Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines|policy or guideline]] while violating its spirit or underlying principles;<br/> |
|||
3. Asserting that the technical interpretation of [[Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines]] should override the underlying principles they express;<br/> |
|||
4. Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions.}} |
|||
:He reverts others editors contributions without consensus, then when multiple editors override his repeated reverts, he accuses '''them''' of revert-warring. When outside editors come to the articles he's decided to [[WP:OWN]], I believe they are worn down by the [[WP:TLDR|Too Long, Didn't Read]] morass on the talk pages, and they simply decide it's not worth the time or struggle. This in not helping the 'pedia, and it is infringing on the collegial environment and collective spirit of Wikipedia. |
|||
:When other editors stand up to him, he has shown retaliatory, [[WP:HOUND]]-ing tendencies, as seen by his actions on the [[Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism]] article and talk page, which he "discovered" and began focusing on intently after I brought attention to his actions on [[Triple Goddess]] and [[Horned God]]. - <font face="comic sans ms"><b>[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:#009">Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]]</b> [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 18:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you for taking the time to be so clear and detailed. Yes, this is the impression I got too. I appreciate the reality check. <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 19:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)</small> |
|||
: I'm sorry you think that I was [[wp:hound]]ing you at [[Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism]]. I just happened to come across the article, and as the resulting demotion from GA status shows, I was correct that the article has multiple problems. Really, it was (is) nothing personal. I see no problem in removing [[wp:or]] or uncited material without forming a "consensus". You might have a different opinion. Further, I would be interested in understanding what misinterpretations of wikipedia policy I have used to justify my actions etc. - drop me a note on my talk page with some specific examples from my edit history if you have the time. Thanks. [[User:Davemon|Davémon]] ([[User talk:Davemon|talk]]) 22:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Now *I'm* [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Triple_Goddess&diff=317272487 being accused of WP:TEND.] Enjoy the irony. Miss you there! <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 00:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)</small> |
|||
And see [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Sizzle_Flamb.C3.A9_reported_by_User:Akhilleus_.28Result:_.29|Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sizzle Flambé reported by User:Akhilleus]] ! Would you care to comment? <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 23:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)</small> |
|||
*Thanks! <small>— [[User:Sizzle Flambé|'''Sizzle Flambé''']] ([[User_talk:Sizzle Flambé|☎]]/[[Special:Contributions/Sizzle_Flambé|✍]]) 02:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)</small> |
|||
::A note on my comment about the need for POV and accuracy flags on the article, or at least on the last version I saw of it. I think it is important that the article's name accurately reflect its focus. My concern with the article is that a Wiccan/Graves/Modern-Feminist-Spirituality interpretation has been misrepresented as *the* "Neopagan" perspective. Neopaganism is diverse, and only some faiths pay any attention to the Maiden-Mother-Crone thing. My concern with the article all along is that it should not imply that all Pagans, Heathens, or Neopagans see "triple Goddess" as meaning Graves' modern Maiden-Mother-Crone configuration. I've seen too many shoddy, Newage and Neopagan writers abuse this theory and try to shove Goddesses like Brighid, An Mhorríghan, and various other historical Goddesses into that ill-fitting format. It's a format that is irrelevant to many traditional cultures. So I think we need to be very careful to not make it sound like "Neopagan" = Wicca. In my low level participation there in the past, I tried to make this clear, but Davemon made it a [[WP:BATTLE]]ground environment, and I just don't care enough about the article to fight with him. This is how editor after editor has been discouraged from working on the article. I don't think Davemon understands the field well enough to make some of these calls. Or if he does, he just doesn't care. - <font face="Georgia">[[User:Kathryn NicDhàna|<span style="color:#009">Kathryn NicDhàna</span>]] [[User_talk:Kathryn NicDhàna|♫]]<font color="navy">♦</font>[[Special:Contributions/Kathryn_NicDhàna|♫]]</font> 04:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Vandalism == |
|||
I thought that removing [[WP:N]] tags was considered to be [[wp:vandalism]], both under the category of 'avoidance' and [[wp:gaming the system]]. My mistake if this is not the case. [[User:Davemon|Davémon]] ([[User talk:Davemon|talk]]) 22:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:23, 3 October 2009
the Moon |
3rd quarter,
88%
|
For the sake of conversational continuity:
I like to keep conversations in the same place, when possible.
If you leave a message for me here, I will usually respond here.
If I leave a message on your talk page, I will do my best to watchlist your talk page and read your response there.
However, as my watchlist is rather voluminous now, if you want to make certain I see your response you might need to post it here. If the matter is time-sensitive, I will reply on your talk page so you will be notified promptly, and please feel free to post important replies to me here, for the same reason. The orange bar is your friend.
Tapadh Leibh (Thank You),
--KPN
P.S. Please respect Wikiquette, which means: assume good faith, be polite, and bear in mind what Wikipedia is not. You may also enjoy Tips for the Angry New User. If you are an admin considering going Rouge, you may appreciate these makeup tips.
Right now a primary need for Wikipedia is to retain productive editors. If you are here to argue for sacrificing experienced Wikipedians for the sake of disruptive ones, may I suggest this essay.
Where to go and what to do
The Gauntlet
WP:AIV | |
WP:NPP | |
WP:RPP | |
WP:RFA | |
WP:AFD | |
WP:XFD | |
CAT:CSD | |
WP:CSD | |
WP:RM | |
WP:RAA | |
WP:DR | |
WP:TM | |
WP:TT | |
WP:RCU | |
WP:LOP | |
CAT:AB | |
WP:VP | |
WP:BS | |
WP:RD | |
Sources | |
WP:NFC | |
WP:IUP |
|
Hi Kathryn. Apologies for the intrusion, but I've been trying to stir the Clans project into hitting some milestones before the main Homecoming events at the end of July. It looks like we should be able to clear all the stubs by then bar the chiefs. To that end, would you mind giving some Wiki-love to Derbfine, Fosterage and the Statutes of Iona? In fact they're not too stubby, but I thought you were probably the best person to just tidy them up a bit - no need to go mad. It would also be nice to get the "Big 3" to GA status - I'd hope to get Scottish clan WP:GANed by the end of this month, Tartan by mid-June and Kilt by the end of June if I can keep my enthusiasm up. Hopefully I have a bit of a crack at the clan article over the next week, after that it would be nice to have extra pairs of eyeballs to look at it.... Best wishes. Le Deluge (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikimedians in Ireland email list
Hi Kathryn:
I'm delighted to announce that we've started a new Ireland Wikimedian email list, that you can join, at mail:WikimediaIE. For Wikimedians in Ireland and Wikimedians interested in events in Ireland and efforts in Ireland. It's there to to discuss meetups, partnerships with Museums and National Archives, and anything else where Wikipedia and real life intersect. Bastique demandez 23:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
User block for 67.173.114.161
A Chaitriona choir,
I think this user needs blocking, but I've forgotten the proper procedure and can't find the necessary pages. All of their edits are vandalism, and they havce been warned a number of times.
Special:Contributions/67.173.114.161
Moran taing, --MacRusgail (talk) 13:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Irish goddesses
Hello there. Great work on Áine. Would you look at Clídna too? I've added some things here and there but the main text is still a mess, and I can't find the source (MS?) for the wonderful John O'Donovan quote someone added. Anann needs work too, and Aimend needs her story added. Mongfind I have what I need for and am still adding to. DinDraithou (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- Go raibh maith agat. It could be expanded far more if I pull out all the books and delve in. But I wanted to at least do a bit while I had a chance. I'll take a look at the others and see what I can do :-) Slán, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Drumanagh
Kathryn, thanks for weighing in on Drumanagh, I appreciate it. Celtic subjects do seem to attract, well, editors with idiosyncratic points of view. --Nicknack009 (talk) 18:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- No prob. It was immediately clear what the situation was. Though now I feel like someone should make a lolcat of it: "Nationalistic Nationalists are Nationalistic" ;-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 18:59, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Heh heh. Incidentally, if you want a laugh (or a head-desk moment), you should have a look at the book Romandrumanagh linked to, The British Chronicle by David Hughes. Fascinating the things people will write with a straight face, and find publishers for. --Nicknack009 (talk) 20:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Followed a trail of links that ended up on a Wikipedia article, was still logged in, and noticed I had new messages. I appreciate your efforts and admire your dedication to duty. I'm glad you've shown Romandrumanagh for what he is, and challenged BWilkins on his behaviour. But it's got to the point where, for me, Wikipedia just isn't fun anymore. Time to walk away. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- I understand. I just came off what was pretty much a year-long wikibreak. I didn't decide to go on wikibreak, I just had more pressing concerns, and it didn't seem to matter so much to me. I do have things I should be doing instead, really, but I find WP an oddly relaxing hobby, would you believe. But when it becomes more stressful than fun, there's really not much point. Too many people who would otherwise be building the encyclopedia are having their time wasted by disruptive editors. Some things will have to change with this project if good editors are to be retained. But, well, we'll just have to see if that improves. Those of us who want stricter standards for editing privileges, flagged revisions, etc, may be in the minority. Anyway, be well, and feel free to contact me off-wiki if you like. Slán, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Followed a trail of links that ended up on a Wikipedia article, was still logged in, and noticed I had new messages. I appreciate your efforts and admire your dedication to duty. I'm glad you've shown Romandrumanagh for what he is, and challenged BWilkins on his behaviour. But it's got to the point where, for me, Wikipedia just isn't fun anymore. Time to walk away. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Heh heh. Incidentally, if you want a laugh (or a head-desk moment), you should have a look at the book Romandrumanagh linked to, The British Chronicle by David Hughes. Fascinating the things people will write with a straight face, and find publishers for. --Nicknack009 (talk) 20:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
natives
in the article on the us natives i reverted an edit of another user, trying to restore an image, yet I accidently changed the infobox religions. this was not my intention. i had copied the infobox of an earlier version, and, in a hurry, i took a wrong one. now it seems to be in order, all of it. in any case, if i did anything wrong (and i believe you told me i did), then, for that i am sorry,
won't happen again, i can assure you
i am not a regular editor anyway, only occasionally when i feel i have to correct something,
greetings,
94.212.216.150 (talk) 15:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Good to know :-) It was a confusing edit history. I'm not sure who removed that image, but since no rationale for removal was offered that I could see, I put it back in. Thanks for the clarification. Slàn, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 19:44, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Added "#fragment-2" to your href for "The Examiner Bio"
... on Talk:David_Seals, diff: [1], to make the actual "Bio" come up without having to click it. Sorry to meddle with your text, it seemed simpler to do than to explain. If you'd prefer to undo it, then I doubly apologize, and profusely. PhilbertB (talk) 03:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up. Yes, in most cases it's not OK to edit others' comments. But it's good to have a more direct link. Thanks for telling me :-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
What the...?
Mistake? --Closedmouth (talk) 09:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh crap. Yeah, that was definitely a mistake. Thank you for fixing it. Good thing I wasn't trying to organize images on the main page ;-) Slàinte Mhath, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- No problem, happens to the best of us :) --Closedmouth (talk) 06:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Photo of a naked woman
Salut Kathryn. Merci d'être un éditeur de Wikipedia. J'ai mis une photo d'une femme nue sur ma page. J'adore les femmes. Je pense qu'ils sont beaux. Je ne crois pas à la censure. Je suppose que toutes les images sur Wikimedia Commons sont approuvées. Est-ce exact? Si je trouve une photo là-bas, je suis chargé du contrôle des droits d'auteur? Je ne sais pas comment vérifier les droits d'auteur. Je pense toujours la nudité est une bonne chose. Je suis un Américain. Mais les gens sont arrêtés pour être nue ici. Je pense que Wikipédia devrait être ouverte, libre, non censurée. Tomwsulcer (talk) 04:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Tomwsulcer
- Oui, les femmes sont très belles. Je l'adore aussi. Pardonnez-moi pour parle en anglais; je comprend, mais mon francais est très "rusty". I have no problems with nudity. It's not about censorship. It is rather a question of proper permissions: Did the individual in the picture give their permission to have this nude photograph of themselves posted on the Internet, and released into the public domain? I see no evidence of such permission. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 19:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- http://translate.google.com/translate_t#en%7Cfr . J'aime Google. Mon francais est très "rusty" aussi. DinDraithou (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- Kathryn, je vous remercie d'avoir répondu à mon commentaire en français. J'apprécie ce que vous faites. Il ya une chance que la femme dans la photo ne voulait pas que sa photo affichée. Alors vous avez la protection de ses droits à la vie privée. Et, vous appréciez la beauté du corps féminin. Moi aussi. Pourquoi les femmes sont belles? Je ne sais pas. C'est un mystère. Un jour j'aurai le courage de mettre mon corps nu sur Wikimedia Commons. Si je poste ma photo nue, voulez-vous mettre vous aussi? Je suis un Américain. Vous êtes un Européen. Ce sera un cross-atlantique déclaration politique. Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Tomwsulcer
why did you delete my article
hi - re: pigpen music festival
I'm new to this & created a page for my friends music festival, which is a non profit making community music event supported in part by local business & community organisation & run by volunteers
I spent some time - even though I am also busy in 'real life'- creating this page & trying to research the rules on what is advertising & what is not, what kind of articles are permitted etc.
I had referenced the article with links to press articles etc. & believed I'd followed the guidelines - can you advise where I went wrong please
86.171.28.109 (talk) 08:44, 29 August 2009 (UTC
- Are you Sugarstone? If you are involved in the festival, you shouldn't be writing about it here. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a webhost. Articles need to be about notable subjects and neutral. The article read like an advert for the event, and your contributions here so far have all been about promoting the festival. Another editor proposed the deletion on lack of notability, and I concurred. While it is possible that the festival is borderline on notability, or could become notable in the future, the article as it stood did not make a convincing case for such. Also, any content posted here must be original writing. IIRC, the article was largely a copyright violation from the promotional website. Cheers, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
OK Kathryn - that is very clear - thank you very much for taking the time to respond. regards Sugarstone...learning see? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.74.29.10 (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Druid
I do not understand why the topic I left on Druidism was deleted. I used many references supporting my topic on a opine issue of druidism by all definitions has as much supporting evidence as I shown, Druidic Doctrine. There isnt a druidic doctrine, nor there ever has been. it is individual and organizational discretion. If my article needs revision, I would like to know what it would be other than just "your contribution is deleted because the administrator disagreed". This is wikipedia, every article is full of unreferenced, opine material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deanthegreen (talk • contribs) 01:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
- You inserted a long, completely unsourced essay on your theories into an article that is not about Neodruidism. Three editors have now talked to you about this, and you have responded with revert-warring, personal attacks and the removal of warnings from your talk page. Also, it's not "your article", it's Wikipedia's article. If you can't learn to follow WP policy and cooperate with other editors in a productive manner, your ability to edit here will be taken away. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, yeah sorry about that, when I'm de-orphaning I quite often stumble accross another article with multiple issues and try to resolve them at the same time, just earlier I was working on 4 articles at the same time, and occasionally I trip over myself as I did there, I'll be more careful in the future though :). Regards Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 20:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. I was going to drop you a line, but it looked like you were on a roll. And anyway, it tipped me off to a whole bunch of articles that need help, so in the end it's all good. :-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- Great! Hope to see you around. :-) Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 20:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Re:Druid
Kathryn,I would like to start by apologizing, Druidism is a topic that I take very seriously, as well as anyone who would take the time out write about any subject, would also feel. My response to your deletion of the topic I placed on the Druid page was unwarranted, in bad taste, I feel that it was in a character that ill-represents who I am as a person. Yet I disclosed this poor character.
I understand the full implications as of why you removed my article and your point of view on the subject. Though I acknowledge that my actions there after of the deletion were of my own, I feel that after spending hours of editing and construction of a beneficial insert in wikipedia, a more compassionate method of notification of deletion of an article would have been more well received. For an example using verbiage like, "as you apparently have","attempting to say", etc. Using emotional, unprofessional notifications like these will ensure to you to receive more ugly texts in future from other individuals. If you had refrained from using this method in the beginning, I would have most likely been enraged all by myself, instead of sharing it with you and others.
Furthermore, If you do find this message in offense, or a personal attack on your person, rather seeing this insert as an apology and professional constructive criticism, then by all means please make due on your threat and block me. It will be very easy to create a new user profile, with very little effort on my part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deanthegreen (talk • contribs)
- Hi Dean, I was wondering when you'd be back. Anything you'd like to tell us about Ndstog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) ?? Cheers, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
LisaPea
I wonder if this person is also operating the account Laaa Pea! (talk · contribs)? The names of each are very similar and they both focus pretty exclusively on that one spammy article. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 01:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Quack. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Mariposa woman seems likely too. Want to file SPI? <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 05:18, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Fine with me. I think they're all the same user; all three are spammy SPAs, and have been disruptive. Revert-warring, removing templates, refusing to engage with other editors until blocked. I was going to give the user a chance to deny it, but if you want to go ahead, that's fine, too. I considered blocking her myself, but an admin who hasn't done anything on the article should do it. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 05:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Mariposa woman seems likely too. Want to file SPI? <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 05:18, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Quack. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Message for you
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Jim Morrison
Hi. I noted that you had left a warning at User talk:78.157.22.205 about edits on the Morrison article. However, I did want to point out that the IP had actually been removing the silly "Morrison is still alive" edit made by User:MorrisonLoyer just prior [2], although the "alleged books" remained. Perhaps the IP was the same person, but if not, the warning wasn't warranted. Just checking. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks; I missed that. Looking into it now. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- It may be because at least at some point, the IP address was warned for edits, but that was long ago. I know my IP is dynamic, so I thought I'd mention it. You're right, there are a lot of fringe people who pop up on the JM article - I used to hope he wasn't dead. Then again, there are the people who think Paul McCartney is dead. Interesting life, eh? Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- ... You mean McCartney's not dead? *snerk* Pray for the health of Ringo, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 18:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
(Talk:) Triple Goddess
In case it's of interest to you, I've added documentation in the Talk page's last section (it's now very long). — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 22:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at it when I get a chance. Thanks. I appreciate more eyes on this situation :-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, after long looooong discussion on the talk page, and having addressed the only two "citation needed"s that anyone came up with, I finally added text to Triple Goddess, much of it restored from just before that edit you noted earlier. It was immediately undone. I'd appreciate your opinion on the matter, in case I'm misreading the situation. Has this become a case of WP:OWN and WP:TEND? — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 11:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. Davemon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) is not collaborating with other editors. His tactic has been to wear others down with verbose, and at times surreal, WP:Wikilawyering on the talk page and tendentious editing.
- Specific points of Wikipedia:Wikilawyering we are seeing here:
“ | 2. Abiding by the letter of a policy or guideline while violating its spirit or underlying principles; 3. Asserting that the technical interpretation of Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines should override the underlying principles they express; |
” |
- He reverts others editors contributions without consensus, then when multiple editors override his repeated reverts, he accuses them of revert-warring. When outside editors come to the articles he's decided to WP:OWN, I believe they are worn down by the Too Long, Didn't Read morass on the talk pages, and they simply decide it's not worth the time or struggle. This in not helping the 'pedia, and it is infringing on the collegial environment and collective spirit of Wikipedia.
- When other editors stand up to him, he has shown retaliatory, WP:HOUND-ing tendencies, as seen by his actions on the Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism article and talk page, which he "discovered" and began focusing on intently after I brought attention to his actions on Triple Goddess and Horned God. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 18:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking the time to be so clear and detailed. Yes, this is the impression I got too. I appreciate the reality check. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 19:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you think that I was wp:hounding you at Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism. I just happened to come across the article, and as the resulting demotion from GA status shows, I was correct that the article has multiple problems. Really, it was (is) nothing personal. I see no problem in removing wp:or or uncited material without forming a "consensus". You might have a different opinion. Further, I would be interested in understanding what misinterpretations of wikipedia policy I have used to justify my actions etc. - drop me a note on my talk page with some specific examples from my edit history if you have the time. Thanks. Davémon (talk) 22:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Now *I'm* being accused of WP:TEND. Enjoy the irony. Miss you there! — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 00:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
And see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sizzle Flambé reported by User:Akhilleus ! Would you care to comment? — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 23:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 02:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- A note on my comment about the need for POV and accuracy flags on the article, or at least on the last version I saw of it. I think it is important that the article's name accurately reflect its focus. My concern with the article is that a Wiccan/Graves/Modern-Feminist-Spirituality interpretation has been misrepresented as *the* "Neopagan" perspective. Neopaganism is diverse, and only some faiths pay any attention to the Maiden-Mother-Crone thing. My concern with the article all along is that it should not imply that all Pagans, Heathens, or Neopagans see "triple Goddess" as meaning Graves' modern Maiden-Mother-Crone configuration. I've seen too many shoddy, Newage and Neopagan writers abuse this theory and try to shove Goddesses like Brighid, An Mhorríghan, and various other historical Goddesses into that ill-fitting format. It's a format that is irrelevant to many traditional cultures. So I think we need to be very careful to not make it sound like "Neopagan" = Wicca. In my low level participation there in the past, I tried to make this clear, but Davemon made it a WP:BATTLEground environment, and I just don't care enough about the article to fight with him. This is how editor after editor has been discouraged from working on the article. I don't think Davemon understands the field well enough to make some of these calls. Or if he does, he just doesn't care. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 04:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Vandalism
I thought that removing WP:N tags was considered to be wp:vandalism, both under the category of 'avoidance' and wp:gaming the system. My mistake if this is not the case. Davémon (talk) 22:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)