User talk:KazakhPol: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Hilarious |
←Replaced content with '#REDIRECT User:KazakhPol' |
||
| (41 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#REDIRECT [[User:KazakhPol]] |
|||
'''[[User:KazakhPol/Reviews|What are the critics saying?]]''' |
|||
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KazakhPol&oldid=122590288 Archive] |
|||
'''As of this posting I have made 17, 279 edits to the English Wikipedia, 7497 of which I made with this account. [[User:KazakhPol|KazakhPol]] 05:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)''' |
|||
== Hi == |
|||
In response to your note on my talk page - I doubt they would try to block you for pursuing an Arbitration case, and you shouldn't have any trouble getting unblocked if there isn't ''some'' sort of justification for the block. That said, I'd suggest discussing the matter with them or pursuing a [[WP:RFC|request for comment]] first. The arbitration committee generally rejects cases unless there have been extensive efforts to [[WP:DR|resolve the dispute]] previously. On the BLP issue, the prohibition against unsourced info actually ''does'' extend to talk pages, but it seems clear that is in the sense that you can't say 'It has been proven that this kid is alive' on the talk page any more than you can in the article unless you've got reliable sources to back it up. I agree that extending it to suppress statements of personal opinion is a stretch. If they actually ''were'' concerned that the statements were BLP violations (that is, instances where Wikipedia, rather than you personally, was claiming something unsubstantiated) the proper course would be to remove them. That being said, the statements they are objecting to ''were'' deliberately inflammatory and that's a bad thing. When you call the kid and his mother fakes or the other user keeps comparing a source on the page to different holocaust deniers you ''know'' that these are things which the 'other side' is going to find intensely distasteful. It's deliberate provocation and you shouldn't be doing it... any more than Jayjg should be pulling that snide nonsense about being too horrified to believe you are a native english speaker. Nobody comes out of it looking particularly good. State your case, cite your sources, and just stay away from the nastiness. There is no need for it. You can do everything you need to do here without calling the kid and his mother fakes. Doing that serves no purpose except to annoy other people - and any time you find yourself doing that you're working against the goals of the project. --[[User talk:CBDunkerson|CBD]] 00:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Beren== |
|||
I added the info based on the only source already cited, since there was more information there that was not included. --[[User:Otherlleft|otherlleft]] 16:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Thank you for the welcome and the extremely helpful links! So far I'm mostly into proofreading; I only add information when it's easy to find like in this case or when I actually have a clue about the topic! --[[User:Otherlleft|otherlleft]] 16:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Hilarious == |
|||
I guess it means "back off my turf." ;-) <tt class="plainlinks">[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoi]][[User talk:Khoikhoi|khoi]]</tt> 23:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 19:22, 6 August 2010
Redirect to: