User talk:Observation Post

Removal of comments

Hi. Let's leave the removal of comments to the discretion of the users whose talk pages the coversations took place in. Thanks in advance. El_C 12:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edits of banned users are to be reverted. This is always true, but especially so when they are defamatory, as on User talk:Netscott. Though I fully understand the motivation for your actions, please consider how the material you've restored might impact third parties referenced in these posts.Observation Post 12:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to explain to me what the impact might be, specifically. Otherwise, I leave it to the discretion of the respective users. El_C 12:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not actually have to explain it: they are posts from banned users, which are to be reverted on sight. If you have further questions, feel free to contact me by e-mail.Observation Post 12:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say you had to, I said feel free. But, unless you can offer something concrete (in terms of "third parties referenced"), you are not permitted to remove conversations, even if blocked users participated. You need the consent of the other parties. El_C 12:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert again or you may face administrative sanctions. If you wish to involve other administrators, you may place a notice on WP:ANI, or personally contact the three users with your concerns. Thanks again. El_C 12:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

need the consent of the other parties. El_C 12:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC) The users in question are not merely blocked, but banned, a significant distinction. You are certainly welcome to restore comments from active, non-banned users. However, since these were conversations between active users and banned ones, this will make the formers' comments look unprompted and inapropriate. I thought it simpler and more respectful to blank the threads.Observation Post 13:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those active users are experienced editors/admins/arbitrators who nonetheless opted to respond. They could have —and still can— remove the threads at any time. The best thing to do, I think, would be to querry their opinion on the matter. Unless, again, there are pressing concerns. Had the comments been removed on-the-spot, then this would be a nonissue El_C 13:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least some of this material contains personal attacks on third parties. Party A and party B, however experienced (or however banned), are in no position to agree to posting personal attacks on party C. Again, these are banned users, in at least one case for vicious, sustained and libelous personal attacks. Wikipedia is a free encyclopdia, not a forum for libel. Restoring such posts is simply a very bad idea.Observation Post 13:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]