User talk:Georgewilliamherbert/Archives/2013/May
Latest comment: 11 years ago by EdwardsBot in topic The Signpost: 20 May 2013
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Georgewilliamherbert. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Signpost: 29 April 2013
- News and notes: Chapter furore over FDC knockbacks; First DC GLAM boot-camp
- In the media: Wikipedia's sexism; Yuri Gadyukin hoax
- Featured content: Wiki loves video games
- WikiProject report: Japanese WikiProject Baseball
- Traffic report: Most popular Wikipedia articles
- Arbitration report: Sexology closed; two open cases
- Recent research: Sentiment monitoring; UNESCO and systemic bias; and more
- Technology report: New notifications system deployed across Wikipedia
The Signpost: 06 May 2013
- Technology report: Foundation successful in bid for larger Google subsidy
- Featured content: WikiCup update: full speed ahead!
- WikiProject report: Earn $100 in cash... and a button!
The Signpost: 13 May 2013
- News and notes: WMF–community ruckus on Wikimedia mailing list
- WikiProject report: Knock Out: WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts
- Featured content: A mushroom, a motorway, a Munich gallery, and a map
- In the media: PR firm accused of editing Wikipedia for government clients; can Wikipedia predict the stock market?
- Arbitration report: Race and politics opened; three open cases
Comment
Hi, George. I know you're busy, but I just wanted to give you a heads up: Ched has recently acknowledged the fact that he made some past observations about me in a negative light and apologized after I apologized to him if I was ever uncivil or caused any issues with users in any way. I just wanted to fully apologize if I have caused any trouble (whether intentionally or unintentionally), as I did not mean for some things to happen. Having been involved with the project for 6 years and worked on 11 good articles and 10 featured articles, I have managed to improve Wikipedia to the highest degree possible. But when someone posts questionable aspects on my behavior, I get a little shaky and I have an extremely low tolerance towards uncalled for disrespect or comments which I find to be incivil as it can create a power imbalance in communication. By the way, on a irrelevant note, Fladrif has been blocked indefinitely per a discussion at ANI due to personal attacks towards other editors (including myself) and civility issues. Other than that, keep up the good work as an administrator and editor as usual! Best wishes, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
- I saw that in passing, and the situation seems to have resolved in a positive manner (other than for Fladrif). I am always happy when people are reasonable and move past prior unhappyness.
- Thanks for the note. Good editing!
- Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- No hard feelings, George. At least almost all of the issues have been resolved for now since Ched realized that his comments at that AN discussion was one of the comments that cast me a negative light and I felt a little offended by such comments (I was beginning to lose faith in the community due to some accusations on my part, which I consider shameful), since I am a reasonable and peaceable person by nature, and it doesn't matter to me if I get involved in disputes. That discussion was way beyond my control, but the best bet if one is ever in a dispute is to "keep calm and carry on." If you take a look at my barnstars, you can see that this can easily disprove any allegations that one has about my behavior. Also, knowing of Fladrif's entire history, all of his comments towards me comes off as heckling and insulting (especially with this comment towards me), as with most of the community as well. Ridiculous as that comment was, I am not prepared to be subjected to such venom from those types of users and I deeply resent abusive behaviours on Wikipedia as well as some users' unfounded accusations towards me, which to me are considered very shameful as well as an unjustified blemish on my excellent contribution record. As you might know, Fladrif has a long history of incivility and personal attacks towards others and considering the fact that he has been sanctioned at ARBCOM and was warned numerous times about this matter as indicated in the ANI discussion about Fladrif and in this compilation of differences, the indefinite block placed on him by Ched was long overdue and the Fladrif situation has been dealt with, so that made me gain faith in the community. In fact, Fladrif actually drove off Dreadstar (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) off the project for a few weeks during a discussion regarding the Will Beback ban appeal at WT:BASC. I always try to bring things to a positive resolution, but I admit that I have provided inconclusive evidence and made some mistakes on my part in the past, so I apologize for that as well. I honestly do not intend to break any policy and guideline in doing so. Ever since I came to Wikipedia, I have always maintained a strict policy advising against all personal attacks and I never intend to attack anyone on my part. I always follow the relevant policies and guidelines, but sometimes I feel that disruptive users such as Fladrif are keen to point out faults with others (such as Penbat and myself) and are completely oblivious to their own uncivil behaviors. As what Kurtis pointed out to me, being involved in one of Wikipedia's civility disputes as a regular established editor is a "soul-sucking thing." I think that it would be best to hope that we can come to some sort of solution that involves as little drama as possible. It's a little frustrating when disruptive users such as Fladrif can attack other users and have a long history about it. Also, people often don't know me personally and can make some pretty bad assumptions about me, and I don't really appreciate it when it happens. I find that some of the incivil and abrasive comments towards me by disruptive users are very shameful, and was one of the reasons that I refused to participate in some AN discussions. I try not to push the wrong buttons when trying to deal with other users, but I might have done that accidentally, and it was obviously not my intention to hurt or upset anyone. Also, I think it's best for anyone not to deal with difficult editors as it can cause seriously undue stress, as what my fellow editor/administrator User:Sergecross73 pointed out to me. I have been subjected to very serious personal abuse from several other users in the past (especially from users like Fladrif or Fragments of Jade), but I have mostly carried on with my business afterwards. Thank you for your comments as always. During my time here, I've blown up at users before, apologized and try my very best not to do things like that again even though I always have and always will stand by my decisions in community discussions and I always make my points clear without disrupting Wikipedia to the best of my intentions, but that's what separates it from my dealings with disruptive editors. Again, if I did something to upset anyone, or if I might have uncivil or caused issues with users in any way, then I apologize. Ched's apology towards me did mean a lot to me as a veteran Wikipedian. I am sure most of the past situations will work out in a positive manner, but I have some doubts about those since some past situations did not work out as is the case with one of FOJ's sockpuppets, who has a history of personally attacking not only me, but other users. That made me realize that I cannot trust sockpuppeteers, especially those of banned users (i.e. Fragments of Jade, Yourname). In my opinion, I think I have pursued things a little bit too far, but no personal attacks are intended outright on my part. I would like to quote the immortal words of Wehwalt, "There are too many people here that think contributions excuse conduct, and that clever language, so desired in articles, is to be applauded on talk pages even if insulting regardless of the effect on the recipient. That is wrong." All the best and happy editing as well, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:03, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!
| World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 19:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
The Signpost: 20 May 2013
- Foundation elections: Trustee candidates speak about Board structure, China, gender, global south, endowment
- WikiProject report: Classical Greece and Rome
- News and notes: Spanish Wikipedia leaps past one million articles
- In the media: Qworty incident continues
- Featured content: Up in the air