User talk:Matilda: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
:::::The Waldorf fire is stil burning - I lost my cool there as well and sent them off to mediation :) One can only take so much. I'd advise you to steer clear of that mess if you're feeling down... -- [[User:Longhair|Longhair]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Longhair|talk]]</sup> 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC) |
:::::The Waldorf fire is stil burning - I lost my cool there as well and sent them off to mediation :) One can only take so much. I'd advise you to steer clear of that mess if you're feeling down... -- [[User:Longhair|Longhair]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Longhair|talk]]</sup> 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC) |
||
==Arbitration== |
|||
I have filed a formal request for arbitration regarding the anonymous [[Gundagai]] editor. Please make any statements you feel are appropriate. [[User talk:Thatcher131|Thatcher131]] 01:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:30, 10 October 2006
I will be back when someone takes on the Anon from Gundagai and deals with the abuse I have been suffering. At present it would appear the community is prepared to endorse her edits and abuse of others. See my response to one member of the community at [1] (effective from 9 October) |
Previous discussions:
Archive 1 (March to July 2005) / Archive 2 (August to November 2005) / Archive 3 (November 2005 to January 2006) / Archive 4 (February 2006 to April 2006) / Archive 5 (April 2006 to July 2006) / Archive 6 (July 2006 to August 2006) / Archive 7 (August 2006 to September 2006)
Anon
Thought I let you know that the Anon returned but only stayed for a short time User:203.54.186.203. -- Bidgee 14:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- ...and posting to the Village Pump now - Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Editors Who Are Vandals, and Thugs and Ferals or this diff [2] if it's deleted. -- Longhair\talk 11:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- They're making a lot of noise tonight, which is a good thing. More eyes on the problem. Might be worthy to list at Wikipedia:Long term abuse seeing as your RfC hasn't gotten much of a response :( -- Longhair\talk 11:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- ...and welcome to the RfC, 203.54.x.x - they've finally replied [3] -- Longhair\talk 09:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- Enjoy your holiday - it's high time I had one myself actually. Sorry for hitting your talk page whilst on break (from my dialup connection here in my new home). Enjoy life - don't let your Wikipedia experiences ruin it for you. Speak upon your return. I'll document the experience meanwhile for you ;) -- Longhair\talk 10:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm looking at quitting and having all my edits as well as images removed from Wikipedia since people are treating the anon as the victim. -- Bidgee 01:35, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- Good to see you back - I hope your trip away went well. Now onto the anon :) I've said it many times before, and I'll say it again. The anon is simply playing Wikipedia like a fiddle. They can't be forced to create an account, so in my view, they're using that to their ultimate advantage, and simply gaming the system to cause disruption. I've tried playing by the rules here, but the rules are powerless against liars and fools such as this anonymous editor. My stand now in regards to them is that they can edit, not sign their posts, and disrupt as many other well meaning editors as they like, then finally something may be done about them when others wake up to what we've been dealing with for many months now. As the old saying goes, give them enough rope, they may very well hang themselves with it. Any edits from them I notice, I'm pretending I simply don't see.
- Some people get their kicks in weird ways - and quite frankly Wikipedia does little to reward good editors like yourself who tolerate crap like this for so long. The more disruption they cause for others, the quicker there may be a resolve. Sad, but true. Now back to some real editing, something we've both been distracted from for far too long. -- Longhair\talk 10:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think it's a clear cut case of the community preferring one editor over another. It's the assume good faith dream at work here I think. Whilst I'm a believer of assuming good faith towards all editors, I can tell you now, any good faith I began to assume from that editor disappeared months ago. Go kick the side of the shed or something - it might help :) -- Longhair\talk 02:00, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, one more thing; here's how I'm coping - I dropped the relevant articles from my watchlist (for now), and don't intend to even take a peak at what's going on. The temptation is hard to resist, but try it. Perhaps choose a random topic of interest and plough into that effort on the other side of the encyclopedia. Who knows, when you come back to the articles you've dropped, the dust might have settled, and a few others might have lost their cool with the anon just like we have, forcing them to either disappear, or change. -- Longhair\talk 02:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- The Waldorf fire is stil burning - I lost my cool there as well and sent them off to mediation :) One can only take so much. I'd advise you to steer clear of that mess if you're feeling down... -- Longhair\talk 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Arbitration
I have filed a formal request for arbitration regarding the anonymous Gundagai editor. Please make any statements you feel are appropriate. Thatcher131 01:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)