Jump to content

User talk:Notmyrealname

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NYScholar (talk | contribs) at 10:04, 22 April 2007 (notification). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Edits to Stock

Hi--you're right. I deleted your link by accident--I was rolling back a couple versions, and your edit snuck in there, and I missed it completely. Didn't mean to imply it was linkspam--that was my summary of a later edit that didn't involve your link. Sorry for the confusion. · rodii · 18:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Davis reference in Oakes College

I went ahead and addressed your concern about the reference to Angela Davis in the Oakes College article, on Talk:Oakes College. szyslak (t, c, e) 00:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation on Rush Limbaugh Page

Would you mind weighing in with your opinion on the Chelsea Clinton incident? It is now under mediation. Eleemosynary 05:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do, but a quick look tells me that you need to step back and chill out a little. Can't fight all the wingnuts at once.Notmyrealname 03:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contact

Can I interest you in enabling email via wikipedia? - Yellowdesk 15:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

What you said

  1. As I noted on the talk page, the item has been widely reported in major media on all sides of the political spectrum (you can Google "Romney Grandfather Polygamy" for a quick list of links), many of them quite recent.
  2. This page has several detailed discussions about policy decisions taken by Romney, and many of the news articles specifically cite this fact in reference to Romney's views on gay marriage.
  3. Romney himself frequently jokes about polygamy while discussing the gay marriage issue, as shown in the Slate article that I use as the primary reference.
  4. Mitt Romney has many blood relatives as a result of his ancestor's polygamy and it could reasonably be argued that this has some bearing on his current views (or at least opens some of his statements about the history of one man/one woman marriage up to question).


My thoughts

How was it reported? It was reported as an interesting fact to go along with his being Mormon and his same-sex marriage thoughts, so this should go with information relating to those items since those items are what make it relevant. It's not qualified as Trivia because its not relevant to the Governor, its relevant to his positions. Does that make sense? (Disclaimer: I haven't looked to see if you already tried this) \/\/slack (talk) 23:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA

Hello, my name is James Paul and I am the person who will be working on your case. If you have any questions feel free to ask me. Have a nice week and god bless.--Sir james paul 21:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, its me again. Can you please tell me more about this conflict on my desk and anything else I should know. Also I think the best thing for us to do is to try to get this done by the 7 of the new year. Have a nice week and god bless.--Sir james paul 12:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and thanks for taking this on. What's the best way to communicate with you -- on this page, on yours, or on the discussion section of the AMA request?Notmyrealname 17:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • On my talk page. When you are talking with the other side about this talk on my desk. For the next week I will be talking with you and after that I will start to talk to the other side. The best thing you can do in this case is to not only be civil but be friendly, this will help make things better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership_of_articles The pages above should be of some help. Have a nice week and god bless.--Sir james paul 21:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think the reason why they do not want Mitt Romney's family history of polygammy in there is because they like him. I think it is not only a content dispute but a POV issue. I will start talking to the other side soon. Just to let you know I agree with you. Have a nice week and god bless.--Sir james paul 22:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's my feeling as well. Most of the editors that have weighed in on this dispute have a history of only editing that page. The thought that some may actually be working for the Governor and/or his political campaign has crossed my mind, but I don't know how one would check this or even if it is against wiki policy. Perhaps a topic for another day. In any case, I thought the discussion would benefit from some outside eyes. Let's see what they say. Again, thanks for putting your time into this.Notmyrealname 22:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir james paul has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The next week I'll be able to spend a lot of time on the case. My other cases are going to be closed and you will be my only one. God bless and merry christmas.--§Sir James Paul<<--wikiholic§ 04:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about not being active in your case but I have not been active in wikipedia. If you need me I am usualy on the AMA IRC, my name there is Sir_James_Paul. Also of course feel free just to leave me a message. You can also email me. God bless. --Sir James Paul 04:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we can keep on talking. Peace. --James, La gloria è a dio 02:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:NPA

Please stop engaging in personal attacks on other contributors (such as me) in the talk pages of articles: Talk:Lewis Libby. Your constant focusing on the contributor and not the content is tiresome and harmful to the editing process. And please stop deleting pertinent, properly-cited, reliably-sourced and verified information from this (and perhaps other) articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's guidelines: Wikipedia:Etiquette; Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; WP:POV; WP:AGF; Wikipedia:Reliable sources; WP:Cite, and so on. Reference: Talk:Lewis Libby. Thank you. --NYScholar 23:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that it is you that has focussed on the contributor and not the content. I have made reasonable challenges to the validity of your sourcing and the relevancy of your edits (as well as the edits of others). I have fully explained my reasoning on the talk page and on the WP:BLPN.

Of me and my edits, you have said on the Talk:Lewis Libby page: ""NotMyRealName" and others are repeatedly going into articles that I am also working on and deleting references that it has taken me a long time to provide," (completely unfounded and false on my part),

"No one has agreed with facts in your arguments. They have agreed with false presentations of facts in your arguments." (A weasely way of saying I'm a liar?),

"don't revert irresponsibly (as you have been doing)" (I have not been doing this, but thanks for the suggestion), "your stubborn resistance to sourced information and facts presented in them is totally wrong-headed" (glad you're not making this personal...),

"I'm tired of Notmyrealname (who may have previously posted in this talk page using an anon IP or another name) deleting pertinent reliably-sourced information." But then you later say that this isn't about me, it's about my edits. If you say so.

I encourage anyone else reading this to check out the talk page and decide for themselves. I suggest to NYScholar that you follow your own advice. Notmyrealname 23:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Due to this user's constant violations of Wikipedia:Etiquette and Wikipedia editing policies, I do not want to engage in any further interaction with this user. I have moved his comments from my talk page to this talk page (where they belonged, as they were a reply to my comments here); he has since deleted them. Notice: I remove what I regard as personal attacks from my talk page and elsewhere at my own discretion. My talk page has stated that for many months. --NYScholar 23:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I feel the same way about NYScholar. I did not delete the comments that NYScholar posted here. I only removed the ones that duplicated what was already on this page (at my discretion). What I posted on this user's talk page was the following:

Please stop engaging in personal attacks on other contributors (such as me) in the talk pages of articles: Talk:Lewis Libby. Your constant focusing on the contributor and not the content is tiresome and harmful to the editing process. Notmyrealname 00:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked nmrn to stop harrassing me on my talk page. He is simply quoting the same tagged notice that already appears there in a manner of "tit for tat". I repeat: please stop harrassing me personally. Focus on the content of articles and not on the contributor(s). I strenuously object to this behavior and, I repeat, I will not interact further with this user and I will remove all further comments of this kind that he posts from my user talk page.--NYScholar 00:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I was posting the message because it expressed my sentiments as well. I do not wish to have any further contact with you either. YOU are the one harrassing me, as documented above. That is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Any future comments you post here will be deleted. Notmyrealname 02:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Example. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you, [signature]

Lewis Libby

I've looked at it, removed the nonsense, and commented on the Talk: page. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Jayjg (talk) 17:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for all your help. Notmyrealname 00:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Talk:Lewis Libby.
For the Mediation Committee, Daniel Bryant
This message delivered: 07:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

Libby page

I'm about to take a break from this whole Lewis Libby thing, as it's gotten a bit out of control. I would appreciate if you would weigh in on whether you think NYScholar's latest edits constitute original research. I'm getting the feeling that both I and NYScholar are starting to lose a little perspective on the whole thing so I'm hoping some others with diverse views will chime in. Thanks either way. Notmyrealname 23:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Notmy, To be honest I haven't watched this that closely. I was just trying to add Libby's ethnicity to the article, thats it. If somebody is going to say that Libby's action's are effected by his ethnicity, they better have very good sources that say the exact same thing, or yes it is original research. My advice would be to not to take this too seriously or personally and to also step back and take a break. I know this is easier said than done. Also, getting other folks involved is always a good idea as well. Anyways, good luck! --Tom 16:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP policy on categories in Biographies of Living Persons

[WP:BLP] states that

"Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for the category must be made clear in the article text. The article must state the facts that result in the use of the category tag and these facts must be sourced.

Category tags regarding religious beliefs and sexual preference should not be used unless two criteria are met:

  • The subject publicly self-identifies with the belief or preference in question
  • The subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life"

Category tags that do not meet these criteria (i.e. case must be made in article text, subject must publicly self-identify with beliefs, beliefs must be relevant) should be deleted. Notmyrealname 18:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Libby

You may be right. However, despite the fact that he is getting no support on the Talk: page, he continues to insert the material, and post incredibly lengthy and bizarrely rambling supports for it on the Talk: page. The material obviously violates WP:BLP; I could block him instead, but at least I respond. Jayjg (talk) 18:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Temple page as well? I didn't know that. This WP:POINT needs to stop. Jayjg (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He started an RFC, which I re-wrote into English, and which you were kind enough to move to the proper place. The reaction so far seems to be in favor of WP:BLP; perhaps that will solve the problem. Jayjg (talk) 21:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am issuing a warning here to both the owner of this talk page and those commenting on me on it: See WP:NPA. You are all inappropriately engaging in focusing on me as a contributor, which violates Wikipedia policy. Moreover, you are engaging in libel. Remove your comments about me from this talk page and stop this nonsense. There is no consensus for what you are talking about. Conspiring to block another Wikipedia editor also violates Wikipedia policies. Consider this a warning prior to a report. --NYScholar 22:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no conspiracy to block anyone here. All of the comments on the rfc were against your position. Please do not post any further on this page. To other casual readers, please note that the above post by NYScholar was made after his being warned by another editor for his threatening conduct towards me on the Talk:Lewis Libby page.Notmyrealname 22:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is another untrue statement. I posted the comment before seeing the other user's remark. I noticed that my name is being linked to on this page. I object to discussions of me on this talk page. I removed the nasty comment from my own talk page placed there by this user. Once again, stop talking about me here. You violated WP:NPA. --NYScholar 22:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The sequence I describe is correct. As to the "nasty comment" the user refers to, here it is: "Please do not make unfounded and malicious edits and accusations on my talk page." The sentiment stands. I would welcome any reporting. I leave up these silly accusations for others to make their own judgments. Notmyrealname 23:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The sequence is absolutely not correct. I posted the comment here before I saw and posted the response to the comment in the talk page of Lewis Libby: See Talk:Lewis Libby. As far as the word "malicious" and "accusations" go: in my view, those are "nasty" comments. This user has no business discussing me (another Wikipedia contributor) on this talk page. Doing so violates WP:NPA. --NYScholar 23:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Stop harassing me. We were not talking about you. We were talking about edits that you and others have made. Notmyrealname 00:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To other editors viewing this, please see the Talk: Lewis Libby page, and the earlier collection of personal attacks this user has made against me. Judge for yourself. The user has been blocked. Notmyrealname 00:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom/Lewis Libby; Temple Rodef Shalom[1]

Updated. --NYScholar 10:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Notmyrealname&oldid=124830510"