User talk:WAS 4.250

From Wikiversity

Jump to: navigation, search

My main account is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WAS_4.250. WAS 4.250 14:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Archives: 1

Contents

[edit] project content

"copy one or more of your user subpages to project space" Which pages are you thinking of? Do you think User:JWSchmidt/Moulton or User:JWSchmidt/ethics might be useful as pages in the project? --JWSchmidt 18:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I think both would be appropriate project learning resources. WAS 4.250 18:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm happy to defer to your judgment. I confess that I am not entirely familiar with the layout of the project pages, so feel free to copy content from my user subpages to any point in the project where you think it is useful. I am particularly concerned with Case 5 — IDCab systematiclaly publishes false and defamatory content in BLPs...that's basically the subject I am studying at User:JWSchmidt/Moulton. --JWSchmidt 19:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
OK I'll do that. Also, I suggested at User talk:Salmon of Doubt#Request that "Perhaps someone could move all specific cases to their own learning resource pages, and the "main" cases studies page will contain only generic data and links to the specific cases studies. They can also be subpages rather than sub-subpages and can also be linked to at the main project page." What do you think of that? WAS 4.250 19:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

(<---)Yes, each case on its own page is fine. Will you be able to participate at Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Audio or Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Audio/Transcripts? --JWSchmidt 04:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

No, I will not be participating. Thanks for asking. WAS 4.250 05:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Just a thought

Heya WAS. I'm just as appalled as you are... one not-so-happy solution would be to block them both for a while so they can work on their versions in private on their talk pages (they could be transcluded to the project page in the meantime). Appointing a "moderator" might be a bit better, would you be up for the job? --SB_Johnny talk 21:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. What exactly is involved that I am not already doing? WAS 4.250 21:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, I could give you buttons (rollback, block, delete, etc.), but I'd need some way to communicate with you off-wiki during the mentorship period. --SB_Johnny talk 21:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, so sorry, but all communication I do concerning anything related to WikiMedia and its projects is 100% transparent and on the Wikis. Also I never use email for anything - I stopped using email many years ago. Is there any other way I could help other than what I am already doing? I am right now in the middle of responding to the last 24 hours or so of contributions. WAS 4.250 22:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Understood. I guess just keep doing what you're doing, and if you feel one or more parties needs some time off, ping me on my talk and I'll arrange something. --SB_Johnny talk 22:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Understood. WAS 4.250 22:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
If blocked both sides can be expected to have socks or meat puppets as both have plenty of real life friends willing to help them out. WAS 4.250 21:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
If blocks are circumvented, we are well-staffed Checkuser-wise, so that's not a problem. --SB_Johnny talk 21:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm wondering if I have enough material yet to write another ballad or atrocious song parody. I really need The Fieryangel here, as he actually knows how to craft decent music. After all, I'm no Prokofiev. —Moulton 22:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Searching for a solution

I am certain, WAS, that you are well aware that my problem with your pet "project" is that parts of it have nothing to do with "ethics" at all. In fact, in order for you and I to reasonably discuss solving the problems, I'm going to have to ask you to acknowledge that the project, as it was operating, was partially being used as a platform to express personal dissatisfaction with a personalized, one-off dispute with the English wikipedia.

Assuming that you can acknowledge that, we can move on. I could obviously use technical means to ban Moulton from any page I wanted to. I am more than proficient enough with Pywikibot to make that happen. I suspect that would quickly lead to Moulton and myself being blocked - and let me make this as clear as I can - I would have no problem at all with just banning the both of us. I suspect that you are reaching the point where you also would have no problem with that.

However, because I believe your project, if you were to clear it out, might, at some point, have some small amount of value, I'll give you the opportunity to solve it. I will take or not take any action you want me to take or not take, so long as the project space here does not decrease in value over the medium (not short) term. I will state for the record, however, that I do not believe it is possible for myself and Moulton to reach agreement on anything, though I am eager to see you try. I strongly suspect that the end result here will either be the deletion of the entire project or topic/project-bans for Moulton and his Wikipedia Review friends along with myself and my Wikipedia friends.

There. Go to it. Salmon of Doubt 22:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Salmon of Doubt, thank you for your well thought out comment. I too am "Searching for a solution". Yes I am well aware that your problem with the ethics project is that you think parts of it have nothing to do with ethics. I acknowledge that all project participants, yourself included, have multiple motives for contributing; and sometimes this has led to it partially being used as a platform to express a variety of personal dissatisfactions such as personalized, one-off disputes in the English wikipedia. If you are serious when you say "I will take or not take any action you want me to take or not take, so long as the project space here does not decrease in value over the medium (not short) term." then please:
  1. Don't talk to Moulton or about Moulton on any talk page. (When I first arrived at Wikipedia, I got into a misunderstanding with SlimVirgin who misinterpreted a remark of mine as an attack, and I solved the dispute by promising her - I thought up the offer, she accepted - I would not talk to her or about her anywhere; about 3 to 6 months later she came to my talk page and asked for help on something so I asked if I was relieved of my promise - which she had probably forgotten - and she said yes)
  2. Ignore Moulton on all talk pages; except for deleting anything he says on your talk page
  3. The only ethics project pages that you edit should be ones you yourself have created, but feel free to own those.

While the above is written in absolutes it should be interpreted in a common sense fashion, because there will be exceptions that arise. Further at some time, things might calm down enough that it would be useful for you to test the waters by slowing finding more and more useful exceptions to the above until at some time it becomes apparent that there is no longer a need for you to follow the above.

Does that make sense to you? Are you willing to give the above a try? WAS 4.250 23:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Done and done. Salmon of Doubt 14:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much. WAS 4.250 22:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
This page states that "The English Language Wikipedia does not have a Community Social Contract." This is debatable (I disagree, I suspect you disagree as well.). I understand that projects are not required to adhere to NPOV, but do you honestly believe that it's valuable to use Wikiversity as an attack vector against Wikipedia? Additionally, of the examples listed of failures of Wikipedia, all of the RFCs are about Moulton/Intelligent Design, 3/4 of the arbcom cases are about Moulton/Intelligent Design, the rejected case is about Moulton/Intelligent Design and the adminstrator noticeboard example is about Moulton/Intelligent Design. My statement that I was willing to do everything you requested was based around "the project space here does not decrease in value over the medium (not short) term." The linked page is a diminshment in value of the project space. Please instruct. Salmon of Doubt 16:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/The nature and benefits of a social contract is a work in progress. Think of it as a stub. Is Wikipedia made worse if 100 stubs are created? No. It too is a work in progress. Please be an inclusionist and not a deletionist here on this project. I suggest you create a learning resource explaining how wikipedia does have a social contract, as I tried to explain to Moulton on one of his talk pages. (I think the Wikipedia one). I do not believe that the ethics project is using Wikiversity as an attack vector against Wikipedia. Instead, I see it as a place where people can say what they really think without being censored and over time there will arise an understanding of which learning resources are useful as guides to ethical behavior and which show examples of unethical behavior and which are themselves acts of unethical behavior. Consider your local library. It probably has "Mein Kampf" in it. Should that book be burned? No. It shows a very flawed point of view to say the least, yet it is instructive as being an example of just that. So too here. The key is to have a library of points of view that include all sides. Thus your help here is very much needed, if you have a different point of view than is already represented, whether I agree with that point of view or not - and I will probably disagree with your point of view as much as I disagree with Moulton's - and agree with other parts as much as I agree with some parts of what Moulton says. Frankly, I expect that every participant at the ethics project both agrees and disagrees with each other to some extent. That is normal and natural. WAS 4.250 22:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
My library does has Mein Kamph. It does not have Duke, David. Jewish Supremacism: My Awakening on the Jewish Question. Covington, LA: Free Speech Press, 2001. It does not have Trial by Jewry. Manhattan Beach, CA: Truth Missions, n.d. It does not invite white power advocates to select the materials used in the study of the Holocaust. Salmon of Doubt 22:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Review

Please review the edit history of Talk:Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Case Studies. I will repudiate our agreement in 72 hours unless real action is taken to solve this ongoing problem. Salmon of Doubt 20:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Well then, you might as well repudiate our agreement now. WAS 4.250 22:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok. Salmon of Doubt 22:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for giving it a try. I'm sorry it did not work out, but Moulton insists on creating drama. I'm sure I will not approve of what you will do in reaction to behavior from Moulton that I also do not approve; but this is just a wiki, and I refuse to get emotionally engaged over it. WAS 4.250 22:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Original research, points of views, and scholarly ethics

Hello, WAS, On your remark here: I am unaware of any existing WikiVersity policy related to the ability of a project to impose such rules on its participants and am also unaware of any discussion or vote by this project's members on such a thing. Anyone can add anything. That does not make it project policy or WikiVersity policy. Go add "All participants will say neener neener three times fast", and see if it happens. For someone that claims rule based organizations are dysfunctional, you sure act like someone who believes in rules. Even when rules exist; they do not reflect actual behavior.

Since the participants of the said project are engaging in original research and are writing outside NPOV, the research guidelines (or betawikiversity:wikiversity:research guidelines) apply. Hillgentleman|Talk 02:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that information. Since it requires an email address and I do not use email, I will no longer participate at wikiversity. I can be found at Wikipedia if anyone wishes to contact me. WAS 4.250 06:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The email requirement has been proposed (Wikiversity:Scholarly ethics) for participants who want to edit outside of the restrictions of NPOV. There is no need to leave Wikiversity if you do not have email. --JWSchmidt 06:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as I am concerned, it suffices if the person is contactable via an active SUL on another Wiki. Many people register on Wiki with a disposable E-Mail address anyway, so if they disappear from Wiki, I expect their throw-away Wiki E-Mail address will also go dead. —Moulton 20:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. WAS 4.250 06:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jon Awbrey has arrived...

Your prayer was answered: User:Jon_Awbrey

[edit] Removing discussion

While it may not be pleasant to read, your removal of discussion material strikes me as inappropriate. The Jade Knight 08:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

  • As the affected person, I reviewed WAS 4.250's edit and found it OK. I wasn't happy with my own previous edit (new thread) either - the threads really belong together. No action requested, but thanks for your vigilance, Jade Knight. --McCormack 08:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


[edit] CSD

Your page, Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Case Studies 3, is a candidate for speedy deletion. It is currently blank, but states that there are subpages. Could there be links to the subpages, categories added, and the rest? Or would you prefer if this page was to be deleted? Ottava Rima (talk) 13:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It serves no current purpose. Please delete it. Thank you. (It is a left-over from the edit wars. Its useful content was merged back into Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Case Studies1.) WAS 4.250 14:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Done. I wanted to make sure. There were many blank pages up for CSD, but none were directly tagged by the author, so I wanted to make sure that the pages weren't blanked before being filled in later. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 15:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] you...

...are truly an angel :-). --SB_Johnny talk 21:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] upsetting people

"JWSchmidt not recognising that he was upsetting people" <-- there are many subcategories of "upset people". For example, think about the person who has, for years, driven along a street at a speed above the speed limit. Then one day, that person is given a ticket for speeding and getting the speeding ticket "upsets the speeder". Personally, I do not have much sympathy for the person who got the speeding ticket. It is not enough to say, "you upset some people so I had to ban/block/desysop you". Many wiki editors become upset when they are challenged and their edits are questioned. When wiki editors are challenged and their edits are questioned then it is time for discussion. Of course, many wiki editors who should have their editing questioned and examined know that their edits will not stand up to critical examination, so they must game the system. Rather than participate in discussion that will reveal the true nature of their editing, all they have to do is complain, "I'm upset," and find some sysop who likes to wield the ban hammer. --JWSchmidt 15:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

True. But in this case, your response was misunderstood by non-involved people like Johny (I'm talking about what happened before he got involved). And rather than communicate clearly, you confused them by commenting on a comment about a project about a comment on a comment. Lesson: In terms of people's responses, it does not matter how right you are; it matters how right you are perceived; so successful communication is very very important. WAS 4.250 16:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jimbo vs. Moulton

So, you were saying Jimbo has no power?

Did you see what he did to our collegial dialogue on my talk page?

There is still Google cache, but it's not fully up to date.

So shall we revise our model of how much fascism Jimbo is teaching to the youth of the world?

Moulton 05:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:WAS_4.250"