Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Witkacy/Black Book: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Space Cadet (talk | contribs)
8,095 edits
No edit summary
Line 53: Line 53:
*'''Keep''' unless the authors of those quotes apologise or at least show their similar comments offending other nations, proving by the same that general abusiveness is simply their unique style of conduct and somewhat weird sense of humour. On the other hand, I think that their comments on that page shouldn’t be removed and also that their quotes should be deleted as soon as they apologise. But of course it’s up to Witkacy as it is his user page. I understand that it’s not a nice feeling to see one’s name on that page but, though none of those remarks was targeted at me, I felt offended all the same. I don’t understand why some editors can see no way for answering arguments of others without offending the others’ nation. I think that arguments in Wiki space should be focused on well sourced examples while personal disagreements should be solved in Users’ space. --[[User:SylwiaS|SylwiaS]] 23:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' unless the authors of those quotes apologise or at least show their similar comments offending other nations, proving by the same that general abusiveness is simply their unique style of conduct and somewhat weird sense of humour. On the other hand, I think that their comments on that page shouldn’t be removed and also that their quotes should be deleted as soon as they apologise. But of course it’s up to Witkacy as it is his user page. I understand that it’s not a nice feeling to see one’s name on that page but, though none of those remarks was targeted at me, I felt offended all the same. I don’t understand why some editors can see no way for answering arguments of others without offending the others’ nation. I think that arguments in Wiki space should be focused on well sourced examples while personal disagreements should be solved in Users’ space. --[[User:SylwiaS|SylwiaS]] 23:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. User pages are not sacrosanct or rule-free, and thiis paranoid kangaroo-court of a page needs to go. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 00:36, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. User pages are not sacrosanct or rule-free, and thiis paranoid kangaroo-court of a page needs to go. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 00:36, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' of course! [[User:Space Cadet|Space Cadet]] 00:37, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:37, 6 August 2005

User:Witkacy/Black Book

Inappropriate use of user space. Accusing people of racism is a personal attack, violating wikipedia's no personal attacks (ever) policy. If they are guilty this should be brought up at RFC, not in a hate-list.

  • Delete ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 22:53, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As one of the people being abused by this page, I have requested clarification[1]. I have not, as yet, received any, whatsoever, despite the fact that it says on the page itself that improving communication is the purpose of the page. In fact, rather than respond to my request for clarification, the request was simply deleted[2], whereafter an antisemitic troll inserted a comment intended as an attack against me and a couple other users listed on the page[3]—and that comment is permitted to remain. Not only is the name of the page intentionally offensive, but it categorically does not serve the purpose it purports to, and is instead, exactly what -Ril- characterizes it as. (:blush: now I've agreed w/ -Ril- on 2 VfD's in the past hour...what is going on here??? :-p) Tomer TALK 23:15, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - this is a 100% personal attack page --Noitall 23:29, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. User Witkacy is notorious for aggressively pushing nationalist POVs on many articles and attacking people who do not agree with him as "racists" - as if Poles were a "race apart". I have just commented on this strategy here. While I think the motivation behind this page is outrageous, I vote keep for a simple reason: This page helps uninitiated users understand Witkacy's personality and judge his edits accordingly. --Thorsten1 23:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete though I acknowledge WP's considerable leniency with regard to user space, maintaining a list of nasty accusations is beyond reasonable limits. The accusations don't even add up to much anyway... example: "Nohat accused his opponents of being nationalists, which can be treated as offensive remark" So saying someone else is a nationalist makes one a racist? What the heck? Not to mention the fact that this could be considered libel, as labelling someone a racist is a very serious accusation. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:49, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. This is a publicly posted "blacklist", which is actually illegal where I live - and that doesn't even touch the potential for libel vis-a-vis the accusations of racism. Xaa 00:11, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There is a lot of latitude in user space, and WP:NOT censored, but this is too far. -Splash 01:30, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per this policy, which states that WP:NPA applies to user pages and subpages. HKT talk 01:34, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Suspending my vote, for now. While, subpages of this nature are liable for deletion, I find myself appreciating the position of Thorsten1 and Nohat. Also, I feel sort of funny voting on a page partially about myself. We'll see.... HKT talk 02:58, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, users quoted there said what they said in violation of Wikipedia:Civility and WP:NPA rules; judge for yourself: User:TShilo12 [4], User:IZAK [5], User:HKT [6], User:Thorsten1 [7]. For those who don't like the name of User:Witkacy/Black Book section, please see the name of User:Klonimus/AINB anti-idiotarian notice board. --Ttyre 02:04, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ttyre, Klonimus' subpage doesn't target individuals for insult, so I don't understand how it can violate WP:NPA. I'm also curious about where you discovered that responding in kind to incivility or personal attacks is acceptable according to Wikipedia's policies. You don't seem to have gotten that from Wikipedia's policy pages, which state the opposite. P.S. How did my remarks about history violate WP:NPA or WP:Civility? Did I insult any users? Did I accuse any nationalities of possessing intrinsic negative qualities? Did I use profanities? I don't recall doing any of those, yet you charged me with having "(probably) bigoted opinions" (a violation of WP:NPA and WP:Civility in its own right). Please tell me how I violated policy, because I look forward to improving. HKT talk 02:31, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ttyre seems to have succumbed to the two wrongs make a right (fallacy), when in fact, as we all know, two wrongs don't make a right. Nohat 04:11, 5 August 2005 (UTC).[reply]
      • How about applying Newton's action-reaction principle here? I would like to see similar protest to the original "wrong" or action (editors' abusive/offensive language) as to Witkacy's reaction. --Ttyre 11:15, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Physical principles don't apply to social interactions. Nohat 16:44, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
          • Nohat, Google "action/reaction"+psychology to see how this concept, originally applied to physics, has been utilized to describe human interactions. --Ttyre 18:42, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ttyre, you seem to be referring to the tit-for-tat approach. Anyway, if I'm not mistaken, you can't VfD comments on an article's talk page. In fact, it's much easier to deal with comments on an article's talk page if they constitute a personal attack. I believe current policy is that anyone can delete a personal attack from there, as long as it is actually a personal attack. HKT talk 18:33, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • This content is mean-spirited and negative, and that is made all the more obvious by Witkacy's claims to the contrary. That it constitutes personal attacks is beyond obvious. He's a problem user and the value of his edits are strongly overshadowed by his strong bias and clear difficulty in dealing with other users civilly. However, I believe that the content of userspace should be legislated as little as possible, and people should be free to put pretty much whatever they want as long as it's not illegal and isn't physically abusive of Wikipedia servers. As I explained on this page when it was in Wikipedia project space, "Anyone who wants to hate me is welcome to do so in their own private user space". I meant this when I said it. Per Thorsten1, allowing Witkacy to maintain this page will serve as a strong warning to those who deal with him exactly what kind of a troublemaker he is. When one's character is rotten, no one is better at character assassination than one's self. While this content is offensive and in poor taste, removing it will only hide the problem rather than solve it. We don't really fix his attitude problem by removing this page: the bad attitude will persist, and will inevitably resurface in a different form if this page gets deleted. So, while I admire and appreciate the sentiment behind trying to remove this page, I just don't see that there is any point. I take solace in the hope that universal condemnation of the sort being demonstrated so far on this page will help Witkacy realize that he's doing something wrong. It's too bad that when it comes to rotten character, I have little optimism for any chance of rehabilitation. So, with a sad heart, I vote Keep. Nohat 02:44, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Witkacy has already copied this content on to his user talk page. Deleting this page will not actually remove this content from Wikipedia. The fact that he has ignored a request [8] from Jimbo Wales himself, the founder of this project, to cease his campaign of hate, speaks volumes about the quality of his character. Nohat 08:21, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • You ignoring the fact that a lot of Polish users supported the idea of a black book ... Your personal attacks against me are doing nothing to help your arguement--Witkacy 09:56, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

COMMENT. Note that this is not the only place where User:Witkacy keeps track of this stuff. It is also half of the page at User talk:Witkacy/notesik. Note also that when User:-Ril- asked Witkacy for clarification of the /notesik content[9] on Witkacy's talk page, Witkacy reacted by deleting the question and replacing most of the contents of User talk:Witkacy with the contents of this VfD'd page[10] (yes, there are several diffs in there, it took him a while to "get it right"). Tomer TALK 01:40, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete This is an attack page. If there are problems with racist comments being made about Polish people, there are ways to deal with it. Making a tattletale page is not the right way. MicahMN | Talk 05:14, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - attack page. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:20, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per, well, everyone else gkhan 08:09, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Abstain but will comment. The project is dead (there were no edits for almost a month after it was moved to userspace). Or was dead, since some people offended by it last time found out it was still archived around and caused a stirr, raising the dead and stirring emotions again. All things considered, I think this is a big fuss about nothing, or more precisely, about some users making several offending remarks about Poles, failing to apologise, and other users treating minor incivility as a terrible crime. Personally, I despise racial incivilities and generalisation, and overzealous political correctness, and all of that can be see here. I consider that wasting our time through such discussions is a much bigger crime. PS. I like Jimbo's suggestion of transforming this into some kind of educational page, but I don't have any time to do this myself, and I doubt anybody involved is open to such constructive idea. EOT for me, and if never hear about this project again it will be too soon. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 08:28, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Witkacy has added several new users to his hate list. If you want this all to go away, you should encourage him to stop adding people to the list; don't blame the victims for "raising the dead and stirring emotions again". Nohat 09:04, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep--Witkacy 09:06, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy conservare, this is ridiculous. Witkacy ought to put whatever (s)he wants in his/her user space. --Merovingian (t) (c) 10:16, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Given that Jimbo has twice now suggested that the Black Book concept is not a good idea ([12],[13]) and that many editors have expressed a similar opinion, to retain this page would seem to violate WP:NPA and a deliberate act of disruption. We left this page userfied and dormant the first time around; Witkacy's revival of it seems to indicate that it needs to be deleted. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 12:08, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, it's a userspace. They can use it for whatever they want. Deletion would set a bad precedent.Gateman1997 16:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • In this case, the relevance of precedent is very small, given that there's already a clear policy that allows deletion of user pages and subpages dedicated to personal attacks. No matter what the consensus is here, the next guy may have his userspace placed on VfD. Voting keep based on the invalidity of the VfD contravenes Wikipedia policy. HKT talk 18:33, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'm against censorship in User namespace.  Grue  20:05, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Then you should express your opinion on the page that is specifically dedicated to reforming the deletion procedure, instead. =) Under the current policy, you are not permitted to have personal attacks on your user space. =) Xaa 20:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Xaa do you already read the introduction? " This page is intended as an archive of anti-Polish behaviour on various WP pages. Many Wikipedians assume bad faith solely because the wikipedians they oppose are Polish. It is commonly accepted that Poles are nationalists, anti-Semites or simply morons. Such views are promoted by numerous people here, whether conscient or not. In the past this behaviour has led to the creation of meta:How to deal with Poles. Since it's persists, the Polish community joined in the Polish Wikipedians' notice board project has decided to take steps necessary to defend their good name and fight such views by asking all those who promote them to support their statements with facts, diffs and links. We established this page in order to be able to communicate with the offending users without having to resort to WP:RfC, WP:ArbCom or any other serious steps in dispute resolution. This page is intended as a tool and an archive of such anti-Polish bias. It is by no means an attack page directed at any single user or a group. It is not a personal attack. It should not be treated as such - it is simply a collection of quotes from various talk/discussion pages. We are not responsible for the creation of those quotes, we simply archive them here. We are all friends here after all and in our oppinion it is always better to try to reach aggreement before we start the quarrels on who is guilty and why. If you find your name here, feel free to explain the reasons for your statement, demand our apology for erroneus interpretation of your statements - or apologise yourself.--Witkacy 20:38, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment Yes, I did read the page. And, having read it, I come to the following conclusion: You are maintaining a page that accuses several Wikipedians by name of being racist. You are deleting their responses to these accusations, which means they have no ability to defend themselves, and those responses that you have not deleted have not been deemed by you to be sufficient for you to remove the listing and clear their name. By the opening statement on the page (which you have kindly re-posted, above), the only response you are willing to accept is an apology, and it is clear you absolutely and unequivocably refuse to accept anything else other than an abject apology. It is, in essence, a kangaroo court, because people you post on that page are presumed guilty, they are not allowed to defend themselves, they are only allowed to acknowledge their guilt and apologize, and you are publishing this list as a publicly posted blacklist of being Wikipedians who must be shunned for their alledged racism. And, lastly, where I live, a blacklist like this is actually *illegal*. And, I would like to point out that on the talk page for this page, Jimbo Wales himself reccommended you delete this page. You may have heard of him - he's actually in charge of this entire Wiki project, and his opinion should count at least a little because of that. ;-) I am sorry, but yes, I have read the page, and I cannot support your position on this issue. =) Xaa 22:35, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Witkacy, give me a break, this is utter nonsense. This is just like saying "The following is not intended as a personal attack: You bl**dy m***erf****er!" Apart from that, Witkacy just accused me of being anti-Polish or something for posting to my user page in English, and, for no apparent reason, of being volksdeutsch, which seems to be the strongest insult in his book... [14] I'm trying hard to treat him seriously, but keeps getting harder all the time. --Thorsten1 22:59, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
(1) This stuff is cut and pasted (or just moved) from the "Polish Wikipedians' Black Book" page. It was not written by User:Witkacy, whom it obviously pleases to maintain this crap. That said, the assertion that many Wikipedians assume bad faith because the WPans they oppose are Polish is (a) an assumption of bad faith itself and (b) an oblique threat (watch out or we'll list you here!) against all Wikipedians who might dare to disagree with Polish Wikipedians who happened to think this "project" was a good idea. By using mealymouthed weasel wording ("many Wikipedians", "it is commonly accepted", "numerous people", etc. ad nauseum), the proponents of this "project" attempted to absolve themselves of any wrongdoing by purposely offending other Wikipedians.
(2) Half of what's listed on the page presently is only "anti-Polish" if bad faith is presumed...in other words, the supposition that everyone is anti-Polish is the "given", and anything Witkacy doesn't like is "proof".
(3)The "How to deal with Poles" in meta was written by a Pole!!!
(4)I have demanded an apology for Witkacy's (and others', apparently) misinterpretation of my statement, as the page recommends, but my demand was deleted, and thus far no rationale has been forthcoming. It is increasingly obvious that I'm listed there because of the fact that Witkacy is on a crusade against me for nominating Anti-Polonism for deletion. (That article, incidentally, is an even bigger mess of original research and POV-pushing than it was when I nominated it...but of more interest here, perhaps, is the fact that Witkacy was so quick to remove my VfD tag (and did so so frequently), that it messed up my {{subst|s for 15 minutes. Nominating this page for VfD itself is just more in the same vein. See Thorsten1's comments above, accompanying his "keep" vote. Tomer TALK 22:11, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Comment: And the nonsense continues[15][16]. Tomer TALK 20:15, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep I don't happen to think this is personal attack. It is misguided, and Witkacy should immediately request its deletion himself. But it is not anyone else's place to delete it for him, as it, to my mind, violates no policy. [[smoddy]] 22:21, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There's a wide latitude in User: pages, but this appears to be an attack page. I'm torn, because it is evidence of problematic behaviour, but ultimately I think it should go, ideally at the hand of the creator. Jayjg (talk) 22:25, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless the authors of those quotes apologise or at least show their similar comments offending other nations, proving by the same that general abusiveness is simply their unique style of conduct and somewhat weird sense of humour. On the other hand, I think that their comments on that page shouldn’t be removed and also that their quotes should be deleted as soon as they apologise. But of course it’s up to Witkacy as it is his user page. I understand that it’s not a nice feeling to see one’s name on that page but, though none of those remarks was targeted at me, I felt offended all the same. I don’t understand why some editors can see no way for answering arguments of others without offending the others’ nation. I think that arguments in Wiki space should be focused on well sourced examples while personal disagreements should be solved in Users’ space. --SylwiaS 23:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. User pages are not sacrosanct or rule-free, and thiis paranoid kangaroo-court of a page needs to go. --Calton | Talk 00:36, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep of course! Space Cadet 00:37, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Witkacy/Black_Book&oldid=20376996"