Talk:MZMcBride
Metawiki block log. Leucosticte is creating page essays on wiki users based on his personal issues. --Abd (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- How do you know what my motives are? More to the point, why would it even be relevant. Is the article good or not; that is all that matters. Leucosticte (talk) 16:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's a lousy article. It is essentially your own opinion, a few personal judgments presented as if they were fact. A common device of POV-pushers is to make a general claim, like:
- User creates articles with copyright violations.
- And then the pusher points to a single example. A single example is judged and conflated to become a pattern of reprehensible behavior.
- In the original case I have in mind, a fairly new user on Wikipedia had found an article in the Sandbox, had asked an administrator, who had told her, yes, she could create an article with it, and neither apparently thought of copyvio. That's all. We later, working on getting this user unbanned, arranged an investigation of all her work. No other examples were found. And the troll who had attacked her and who had essentially created her ban disappeared when confronted. Ancient history.
- What you cite as what has been "pointed out" is simply an essay entirely by you, but not so identified, except, of course, in History. (mw:Similarities and differences between the Bugzilla way and the wiki way) So what you are doing is transferring debate or argument from elsewhere, here.
- You know encyclopedic standards. You know the difference between opinion and fact. You don't care, you are on a rampage, attempting to extend your battlefields to WikiIndex. Stop it.
- Basic to articles about living people would be context and necessity. If WikiIndex were to have articles on Wiki people at the level of notability and the level of opinion that you are allowing, by your actions, it would become an administrative nightmare. --Abd (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Since when was it a battle? I would say that I agree with what he wrote in his Bugzilla-related essay, and he'd probably agree with what I wrote in my Bugzilla-related essay. Leucosticte (talk) 17:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's a lousy article. It is essentially your own opinion, a few personal judgments presented as if they were fact. A common device of POV-pushers is to make a general claim, like:
Double standards
"Leucosticte is creating page essays on wiki users based on his personal issues." So basically, you can point out people's behavior that you don't like, but you don't want other people's behavior being documented. Doesn't that open up a can of worms too, when it becomes the norm for users to criticize articles based on what they think the article creator's motives are, rather than on the article itself? Anyway, if you get away with this, and Elassint or somebody deletes the article based on a similar rationale as why Research psychologist was deleted, that'll be pretty demoralizing.
Maybe the article shouldn't stay; maybe there are other reasons for deletion, but accusations of harassment are such are the wrong reasons to delete, in this case even more than with Research psychologist, because this article doesn't say anything bad about MZM. Actually, though, I probably shouldn't get demoralized; really I should be used to this kind of stuff by now. Not that this particular case matters that much, but it's more that the precedent will end up applying to other stuff. It'll have a Template:W. Leucosticte (talk) 08:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)