User talk:Mudthang
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Questions? Donations? Feedback?
Talk to me here (I just might check it)
Hey Mudthang. This is Vague Rant. I just thought I'd give you a few pointers. While it is true that when one has an issue with another user, they may need to take it further, usually, they could take it to the user first for their side of the story. You did, admittedly post on my LiveJournal, but you may also have noted that the entry was dated September 21, 2004. That is, it's over two months old. As for your comments on whether I am a "wannabe Wikipedia admin", perhaps you should know that in my time here, twice, other users have offered to nominate me for adminship, and I have denied them. Also, see Wikipedia:No personal attacks. There is no justification for insulting another user. You cite that I know nothing of the subject matter in your articles: this is true, but also irrelevant. You do not own the copyright. Copyright is very important. It is the law. By posting someone else's article, you are breaking their copyright. Regardless of how important an article may be, if it breaks copyright, it breaks the law, and Wikipedia seeks to break the law as little as possible. You broke the law, I removed your content. I am in line with Wikipedia practice, while you were not. There is no room for error, here. I would appreciate a little civility in your future dealings with users. - Vague | Rant 01:37, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
Thank you Vague Rant
For your wise and insightful feedback…
You are obviously extremely gifted at all things and unlike lesser mortals, you are beyond making even stupid mistakes. The humility and grace with which you dispense advice is truly a fine example to me.
Keep well
mudthang
18 Dec 14:55 (GMT+2)
Contents |
[edit] Objectivity and other thangs
Heya. Of course, it is difficult to be purely objective -- part of the fun and certainly part of the challenge of being an Wikipedist is figuring out how to get that neutral point of view. Sometimes it's easy (so and so was born, did the following things, wrote the following things, was praised by someone, was condemned by someone else, and died); other times it's incredibly tricky (just try being objective about Hitler or Stalin.)
A lot of it is about tone. Adverbs and adjectives that are appropriate in press releases are not necessarily appropriate in encyclopedia entries. For example, "widely regarded as one of the most influential knifers" -- widely respected by whom? What's a knifer, anyway? (Beware of specialized terms.) "His proven reputation" -- proven to whom? "aptly called AMOK" -- the "aptly" is more PR-speak.
One learns to seperate the information from the boosterism. You can restart the article, using the official biography as a starting point; write it as if you are describing him, not promoting him. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:16, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Be calm
Hi mt. There is no need for all those messages to Vague Rants page. Just take it easy eh? the pages are listed at VfU, all is well, you just need to be patient and things will work out in the end. Vague is a good bloke who does good work in trying to keep the 'pedia free of copyright problems. I know it turned out that this wasn't one, but we have to be careful about these things. All will be fine. Regards :) -- sannse (talk) 02:00, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Multitude of comments
Thank you for the multitude of comments posted on my talk page. I suppose I shall address them in order.
Okay, the first one, on biting the newcomers. I don't feel that I have done so, if you could cite evidence of this, I would be very grateful. Removal of copyrighted material is in no way biting the newcomers. I'd remove anyone's copyrighted material, new user or no, and have done so in the past. I also make an effort to ensure that the user understands what has happened, with (usually) a message on their talk page and the boilerplate on my user and talk pages.
As for the copyvio process, my advice on where to address ownership or permission of copyright is correct. I don't delete articles, I just report possible copyright violations. Administrators are the ones who need to check the talk page in case a user owns or has permission, not I. The burden of deletion falls not on me. If an article is incorrectly deleted, it is by no fault of mine.
Also, thank you for the compliments on my conduct, they are appreciated.
As for removing comments from my "forum page", I can't say I'm fully aware of what you're speaking of. There was a comment on my user page at one point which appeared to be addressed to you (beginning with "dear mudthang") which Hadal then moved to my talk page, as is the usual process. I responded to the anonymous IP which posted the comment, see here: [1].
In conclusion, it is clear that I have not been uncivil at all. You simply seem to have misunderstood Wikipedia policy, which is neither of our faults. Good day to you. - Vague | Rant 02:07, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
- As I said in my first comment on your talk page way back on the 5th, it's all well and good that you tried to contact me, but you would have been better off addressing such questions to my talk page, which is how conversation is usually conducted at Wikipedia. - Vague | Rant 04:16, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Tom Sotis
That wasn't me. I marked it as a stub. Ask User:Fvw. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:21, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks AllyUnion Mudthang
