User talk:Itsmejudith: Difference between revisions
Ottava Rima (talk | contribs) |
Ottava Rima (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
* "I entered into the discussion on the quality of the source in good faith" And once evidence was provided that he was not an expert on Oscar Wilde, you should have immediately retracted your claims. You failed to do so. That is when your "good faith" turned into outright disruption. You still claim as if your promotion of the source is some how appropriate when reality is clearly against you along with our policies. That is the very definition of a "troll", and if you perform such actions on a noticeboard then you are damaging Wikipedia. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 15:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC) |
* "I entered into the discussion on the quality of the source in good faith" And once evidence was provided that he was not an expert on Oscar Wilde, you should have immediately retracted your claims. You failed to do so. That is when your "good faith" turned into outright disruption. You still claim as if your promotion of the source is some how appropriate when reality is clearly against you along with our policies. That is the very definition of a "troll", and if you perform such actions on a noticeboard then you are damaging Wikipedia. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 15:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:By the way, your claim that I am "angry with you" is preposterous. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 15:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC) |
:By the way, your claim that I am "angry with you" is preposterous. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 15:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Itsmejudith This] is definitely pertinent to the above discussion. By the way, Itsmejudith, I sent an email off to the ArbCom mailing list because of your history with Antandarus and others that are involved in the Persian Empire dispute. There is a lot of evidence of retaliatory practices going on. [[User:Ottava Rima|Ottava Rima]] ([[User talk:Ottava Rima|talk]]) 15:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:26, 23 September 2009
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This is Itsmejudith's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
AfD nomination of Dorje Shugden
An article that you have been involved in editing, Dorje Shugden, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorje Shugden. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?
AfD nomination of New Kadampa Tradition
An article that you have been involved in editing, New Kadampa Tradition, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Kadampa Tradition (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?
Albigensian Crusade
I have posted some updates on the discussion page, some of which concern your comments which may be deleted if you're not prepared to support them with action. Jel
Smile!
A NobodyMy talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Happy Labor Day!
Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 05:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
If your ears are burning
Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Recent_unsuccessful_candidates. - Dank (push to talk) 03:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Consensus is against you
You do realize that multiple people have pointed out the absurdity in even attempting to claim the guy as an expert on Wilde. As such, your continual pushing the matter continues to go beyond point. If you claim as you do that you want to stay in the RS noticeboard and you are pushing obviously wrong statements, then it is clear that a topic ban would be necessary to keep you from disrupting. There is no content dispute. There is no dispute. There are only a few people trying to push an absurdity. You have gone on far enough. If you set up an RfC for me, I will start up a section asking for you to be topic banned because your understanding is so flawed it is disruptive because you have gone to various things to push something that is clearly inappropriate and you wont stop. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- The way to stop bullies is to confront them. Ottava has behaved in this abusive fashion to dozens of people, and it's about time we put an end to it.
- Judith, all you have to do is find someone else who has tried to get through to Ottava. That's not hard -- I tried a couple of times myself. Ottava is way out of line with his shrill and nonsensical demands for bans, blocks, desysoppings, and topic bans, each of which are violations of our behavioral policies, in spite of his wikilawyering. Just say no to bullying. Antandrus (talk) 13:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Antandrus, it is nice to see you here. You do realize that your post is further evidence of your abusive meat puppeting, which can result in desysopping and long term blocks, right? Talk about bullying. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that Ottava has been engaging in this shrill bullying for too long. When we see this combined with his aggressive insistence on preposterous claims it is cleaer he has become disruptive. Paul B (talk) 14:34, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Paul, when you claim that a person who has no background in Oscar Wilde and with no publications on the individual can some how be a "reliable source" for his sexuality without using any references, then your statement lacks all merit. Your pushing the issue here is the very definition of disruptive. I welcome an RfC because there are people like you that have no business in any kind of decision making process of determining what a reliable source is because you are patently making things up. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- "I entered into the discussion on the quality of the source in good faith" And once evidence was provided that he was not an expert on Oscar Wilde, you should have immediately retracted your claims. You failed to do so. That is when your "good faith" turned into outright disruption. You still claim as if your promotion of the source is some how appropriate when reality is clearly against you along with our policies. That is the very definition of a "troll", and if you perform such actions on a noticeboard then you are damaging Wikipedia. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- By the way, your claim that I am "angry with you" is preposterous. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- This is definitely pertinent to the above discussion. By the way, Itsmejudith, I sent an email off to the ArbCom mailing list because of your history with Antandarus and others that are involved in the Persian Empire dispute. There is a lot of evidence of retaliatory practices going on. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC)