User talk:Woggly/archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Israelbeach rfc

OK, here's my thoughts about it.

  1. Don't try to throw in everything you can find; a few salient points suffice.
  2. I'm not sure how [1] shows that Leyden is a "self-confessed SEO". Maybe I missed it.
  3. If you think those other editors are sockpuppets (or meatpuppets, which I think a bit more likely), ask for validation of your belief on WP:RFCU; since they're doing it to avoid 3RR (if they are doing it at all) and to manufacture fake consensus, it should be accepted and checked.
  4. "Presumably" a cause with which he is personally involved? Quite admittedly, at this point: [2]
  5. Legal threats in themselves are grounds for blocking; the legal threat aspect should be emphasized.
  6. There's nothing wrong (other than being wrong) with making accusations of censorship, ugliness, or smelly feet.
  7. Please provide us with an English translation of this piece of evidence so the rest of us can judge what you're claiming (and what he's doing.)
  8. His ignorance about verifiability and its applicability to unsigned comments on talk pages is just that -- ignorance. (Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.)

On the whole, though, it's a pretty good RFC. It's most important to approach creating RFCs from a centered, neutral place; the more excited the author of an RFC sounds, the more it's likely to be discounted. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:20, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Woggly. I've started by taking another look at the sockpuppeting issue. Based on my research, it appears that the editors you've listed are more likely meatpuppets than classic sockpuppets; that is, people who Israelbeach has recruited to join Wikipedia in order to assist him on votes and in edit wars. However, the newest one User:Bluegrasstom is obviously a classic sockpuppet, with the prime candidate for puppeteer being Israelbeach. I can bring this to the attention of a wider audience if you like, say of various Wikipeda maillists; would you like me to do so? Jayjg (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey, why not just throw a grenade into my house? Where do you people get the time for such hate? Lastly, you can contact Bluegrasstom, his real name is Tomer for comment by e-mail or telephone! Do you people have children? Were they ever taken away from you? Would you accept gender bias discrimination as an excuse to take your kids away from you. Your campaign here is a very sad one for which you can read about on my RFC. Best wishes. IsraelBeach 20:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey Beach, I think we found some "meatpuppets" here ;> Am I a friend of Israelbeach? Sure am. Do I respect him as a caring, dedicated dad? Yes. As one who serves in the IDF? Yes. As one who had done more to defend both his kids and country than most of you? Without a doubt. My only question to all of you is why? Why attack a man who has had his children taken away from him? Are you truly Jewish? Do you serve in the IDF? Or am I speaking to Hamas here? Or is it the same people who applauded when Rabin was murdered? I have never seen such organized hate among Jewish people. This is not Judaism. And this hate does not belong on Wikipedia! I ask you all, if you are in Israel, to contact Israelbeach and enjoy coffee together. Talk. Communicate. Don't we have enough problems with Islamic Jihad and Hizbullah? Stop eating one another, communicate and keep both Israel and Wikipedia strong. Nancetlv 22:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Please read the Wikipedia policy No Personal Attacks thoroughly. --BostonMA 23:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I have opened a RFC on Woggly at [[3]] To say the least, it makes very interesting reading for each and every Wiki editor to view. Might just turn this into a Google News story, but that would hurt Wiki. Let's see if Wiki can clean it's own house. IsraelBeach 02:09, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sad to say I expected a response of this sort. --Woggly 06:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please contact me

Hi Woggly,

Could you please contact me off list. Thanks

Cymruisrael 15:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Woggly

I would like to bring to your attention that a request for comment on User:Woggly's conduct has been filed. Woggly, I kindly suggest that you respond to it. Bonnieisrael 18:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that you are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars. IsraelBeach 23:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Don't you think that leaving this note on my page while we are involved in a supposed resolution process is just a bit redundant? --Woggly 05:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
No. You show no attempt to resolve this issue, as I and many others reach out to you to end this dispute in a warm, friendly and respectful manner.
If you do not care to meet in person for coffee, then I suggest on behalf of many of us to have phone contact. It's far better and more effective than e-mail. Do you wish to speak and clear up any outstanding issues so that we can stop taking the time and efforts of others here? So that we can spend this time instead with our children? We share many common threads including contributing to Wikipedia. There is no reason for conflict between us. I'm ready to give it a try. You can write me at e-mail address: jlwiki @ gmail.com for my telephone number. I've separated my e-mail address so that spam robots do not catch it. Best wishes for a relaxing shabbat. IsraelBeach 07:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
No. I have written before, and I repeat: any discussion I have with you will be only on the record and in public view. My disagreements with you are about your use of wikipedia and that alone. I have no other dispute with you, I've never met you before in person or in virtual space, and I refuse to let this matter intrude upon my personal life. If you are truly willing to engage in discussion with me in an attempt to reach a resolution, we can do it on our talk pages. --Woggly 11:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Woggly, you can meet with me for tea or coffee if you wish. Even chat on the telephone to resolve this matter. I think that Israelbeach should be commended for the time and effort he has made to create and edit articles here. Commended also in trying to reach you after several personal attacks and name calling you have thrown at him. If you chose to call me, you will discover that I do not have a man's voice. Bonnieisrael 15:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Let me see if I understand this. Woggly states: "I refuse to let this matter intrude upon my personal life" but yet casts assertions and personal attacks on my character and personal life. And does so from behind a rock, hiding her identity with a total lack of accountability. This speaks volumes for the RfC for which I have filed against Woggly. IsraelBeach 18:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I was incorrect to say that Woggly "hides behind a rock." She revealed her identity publicly on the Internet some time ago with a link to Wikipedia.

So you see G, this is the real world. This is not "Oz".

If you continue to make personal attacks, expect to be accounted for. Best wishes, IsraelBeach 20:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration

Due to new threats left on my talk page and other locations[4] and "outing" of my real life identity[5][6], I request that immediate action be taken agains Israelbeach (talk • contribs). I caution Israelbeach that if he should make any attempt to contact me in the real world outside of Wikipedia, I will take the necessary legal action to protect myself. I am taking the matter up to arbitration, and as of now relinquish my duties as sysop and will no longer be making any non-related contributions to Wikipedia until the matter of Israelbeach is resolved. --Woggly 06:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked Israelbeach indefintely, pending an apology from him and your acceptance of the apology. You don't have to accept it, of course. I hope this doesn't force you to leave the project. --bainer (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your action. I need some time to think about my involvement in the project. Right now I am very rattled and more than a bit nervous about Israelbeach's next line of attack, as he seems insistent on taking this up outside of Wikipedia [7]. In the meantime I think my best line of action is to do as little as possible, and that includes not making any other contributions to Wikipedia. --Woggly 07:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Israelbeach Vs. Woggly

In the past 24 hours there has been an escalation in the war of the words between user:Israelbeach and user:Woggly. Woggly who never apologized for her personal attacks against Israelbeach was never addressed or blocked for these attacks by the administrators. In fact, she has been attacking Israelbeach, whose identity is for all to see, from an anonymous position. Not very fair or ethical!

Israelbeach, in turn, revealed Woggly's identity, something he was wrong for doing. According to Wiki policy: "This sort of behavior is blockable on its own (for example, moving another user's User Talk page), but should be considered an aggravating factor for the purposes of the block. For example, behavior that would earn a 1 day ban might become a 1 week ban if the Administrator believes the behavior was for the purposes of harassment. The block should only be enforced after warning the user and these pleas go ignored."

Israelbeach was warned by user:jpgordon and according to the logs deleted all material within minutes. Israelbeach should not have been blocked according to Wiki policy as he never ignored any warnings by adm but reacted quickly to them.

Woggly is now rightfully worried about legal action that Israelbeach can take against her for stating, without substance, that he was "dangerous" and other accusations made in front of his local community and the world public. She now appears to be leaving Wikipedia on her own.

Solution: Both Israelbeach and Woggly are professional editors and should be encouraged to stay with the Wiki project. The block on Israelbeach should be removed immediately, as it only serves to increase conflict. Remember, after a first warning, Israelbeach on his own removed all personal data even though he thought he was correct due to that personal information regarding Woggly was posted by Woggly with a direct link to Wikipedia that anyone can find on a simple Google search.

Both Israelbeach and Woggly should be warned with no punitive action taken and instructed not to interact with one another on Wikipedia. These are two professionals with tremendous pride - do not expect either to aplogize at this point. We must encourage both users to stay, to avoid court action (with the documentation that Israelbeach has on these clear personal attacks, no judge would deny Woggly's guilt) and keep Wikipedia operating with less negative news coverage.

I do not blame Woggly or Israelbeach for their now wanting to resign from Wikipedia, I place the blame solely on the desk of the administrators (with the exception of user:jpgordon) who could have taken action on the personal attacks which started this conflict. Woggly and Israelbeach are both assets to Wikipedia, all action should be taken to keep them here. I will be posting this message on this proposed suggestion in how to resolve this matter on other pages. Nancetlv 12:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I do not expect or require apology. What I do expect is for Israelbeach to assert clearly that he will never knowingly approach my children, myself or my property in real life. He will not harrass me. He will communicate with me only via his Wikipedia talk page. If and only if these conditions are met, I may be willing to consider further negotation. --Woggly 14:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent events

I sincerely hope the recent turn of events come to nothing and that before long you feel able to return to Wikipedia. --BillC 13:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: your conduct

I didn't have you in mind; some other editors seem to be trying to take pretty much the exact same approach as Israelbeach, turning Wikipedia into a soapbox for their own positions in Ra'anana politics and/or societal issues -- which is really what all this is about (I'm saying this for the benefit of others, who may have lost track of the source of all of this noise.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Resolve Woggly vs Israelbeach

I think that all this has been blown way out of proportion. The original issue raised by Israelbeach was related to father's rights in Ra'anana, a very legitimate news item for discussion. Whether or not this is the appropriate forum for discussion of the news item (i.e. Wikipedia rather than the press) has long been forgotten. As to jpgordon's comment re "soapbox", Wikipedia discusses news item and father's rights is certainly a pertinent news item in Ra'anana. Woggly's personal attacks and legal threats towards Israelbeach and the claim that she is afraid for herself and her children are unfounded and imply that Israelbeach is a dangerous person. What is Woggly's agenda for doing this? I did suggest that she contact me and that I would try to help resolve this issue but Woggly declined. I agree that Israelbeach should not have published personal information. But he was warned and he immediately removed the information as requested. He also stated that he found Woggly's information in a simple google search. The search yielded a site that had a link to Woggly's wikipedia page. In addition, I think the administrator, by blocking Israelbeach, has given unwarranted credibility and support to Woggly personal attacks. harrassment and legal threats. If Israelbeach is blocked for legal threats than Woggly should be blocked for making personal attacks and legal threats as well. Moreover, I agree with nancetlv - the rules have to be enforced equally. It's time to get back on track and stop this unnecessary digression from the real issues. In order to resolve this once and for all, unblock Israelbeach and address Woggly's persistent use of personal attacks and threats. It's time to resolve this and let these two capable editiors continue their work on Wikipedia.Bonnieisrael 18:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To whom it may concern: after mulling it over

The current situation is that user:Israelbeach is blocked indefinitely, for revealing my personal details and for making legal threats against me. I believe he will not be unblocked unless he apologizes and withdraws his threats. I guess I can live with that, providing there are no more new threats or attacks from Israelbeach and his various alter-egos. I have drawn up a request for arbitration but I see no reason to file it as long as Israelbeach remains blocked. I'll be happy to see an end to this ugly episode, I hope this is it. I may take a short wikibreak, but I'll probably return to editing soon. And I'm not going to ask to be de-sysopped. --Woggly 08:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why Is Woggly Not Blocked For Personal Attacks and Legal Threats?

Why is Israelbeach blocked for legal threats and Woggly is not? There does not appear to be equal enforcement of Wikipedia rules in this case. When will Israelbeach's block be lifted? As many others have stated, this blocks serves to create more conflict, not reduce it. Israelbeach states that he acted in good faith. It appears his posting of private information was due to ignorance, not malice as it is documented that he immediately responded to an adm's first warning of deleting all data. By looking at his extensive experience (Newsday, UPI, Jerusalem, Israel News Agency, Google News) Israelbeach normally gets paid well for his copywriting and professional editing skills, here Wiki gets it for free. He has in addition made every effort to resolve this dispute with Woggly, who has rejected his every overture. We should encourage Israelbeach to stay and develop this project. Davidstone 08:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some apology, huh?

I hereby apologize to the Wiki community for...inadvertently posting personal details of a Wiki user. (from User talk:Israelbeach)

I'm wondering if there's a use of "inadvertant" that means "I meant to do it but got yelled at for doing so, so I'll pretend it was an accident"? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I find it hard to accept the argument that Israelbeach was ignorant of the policy against posting personal information. He knew it was wrong a few days earlier when he accused another user of doing the same[8]. In fact, one of his unfounded claims on the RfC he filed against me was that I had posted personal information about him. --Woggly 16:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BLock both of them

Wikipedia is an encylopedia, not a public market where you can stage fights, as a community we WIKIPEDIANS should penalize for some time the use of wikipedia for other uses other than adding USEFUL information, specially if these are threats to both parties' personal life. If the issue continues then, block their IP's indefinetly and erase from talkpages any written aggressions. In my opinion and to make it easier, ignore each other, suck up and drive on and please be tolerant and respectful!! don't waste time on other things other than wikipedia! cheers. --Don Quijote's Sancho 17:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Re: Advice

Thank you for the advice, I will listen to the voice of Reason and Experience, and take things one piece at a time. Hopefully they have figured out that Wikipedians will not stand by and watch them usurp WP for their own purposes, and will stick to editing things they don't feel so strongly about. Thanks also for the sockpuppet tag tip. I think you're right not to use it yet. If it becomes necessary, I'm sure someone will stick it on their pages, but in the meantime... Well, some things stink when you stir them. -DejahThoris 00:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Enforce Wiki Policy Equally - Block Woggly

After reading all the facts of this dispute - I really don't understand why Israelbeach has been blocked while Woogly goes on editing after making very clear and transparent personal attacks, legal threats and overall harrasments against Israelbeach.

I would expect that the managment of Wikipedia and its volunteer administrators would have enforced Wikipedia policy equaly for both sides. Wikipedia could have prevented the above lawsuit if it acted properly and swiftly. Maybe there is still time to avoid it.

I have also been a victim of personal attacks by Woggly (being named a "sockpuppet" without any evidence). If anyone here is willing to meet or speak with me - you are most welcome.

Some editors here are playing childish but very harmful games to other's personal and commercial reputations instead of focusing on the real mission of Wikipedia - creating a fine community service. Bluegrasstom 08:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I would be more than happy to meet you. Contact me via the "email this user" link on my User page.

Cymruisrael 09:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with Bluegrasstom that Wikipedia policy must be enforced equally. Also, please note that Bluegrasstom has been blocked by user:SlimVirgin for simply expressing his views here. That is pure harassment under Wiki policy. Idf-barak 13:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Joel. You should be aware that you weren't blocked 'simply for expressing (his) views', you were correctly blocked for stating that you were currently bringing legal action against a user of Wikipedia. Woogly has not done this and therefore has not been blocked. You can have the block overturned by providing convincing evidence that you have dropped any suit. MilesVorkosigan 21:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] E-mail

Hey Woggly, would you mind e-mailing me? Jayjg (talk) 19:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another puppet of Israelbeach?

Hello again. We may have caught another one: Olmert (talk • contribs • count). Some very strange formatting going on, such as here and here. --BillC 21:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and another: Potterseesall (talk • contribs • count). Does the (Harry) Potter interest sound familiar? --BillC 21:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/o/g/User_talk%7EWoggly_archive_3_99f2.html"