User talk:Orsini/Sandbox3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Purpose of this sandbox page: Preparing for a user RfC.

Contents

[edit] Links and DIFFS to incidents in violation of one or more WP:POLICY

WP:CIVIL [1] Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous - Revision as of 15:23, 2007 February 6

"You sound more like a zealot or a fanatic."

WP:CIVIL [2] Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous - Revision as of 15:23, 2007 February 6

"You sound more like a zealot or a fanatic."

WP:CIVIL WP:NPA [3] User talk:BTfromLA Revision as of 05:45, 2007 March 16

"I see that Smee has started his grease machine. You would not believe how much crap he has skated on so far."

WP:CIVIL WP:NPA [4] Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard Revision as of 16:26, 2007 March 13

"Whoops. Major whoops. I thought that User:Athaenara was making a witticism with the above psychobabble but I see here that she takes herself seriously. Apparently a nascent policy to be named Assume Mental Illness."

(bold in original edit)

WP:DR WP:CIVIL WP:NPA User_talk:Justanother/Archive4#What_are_you_saying.2C_exactly.3F

"Hi. First, please let me know your religion or other spiritual beliefs (or lack of), your race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. so that I can cast aspersions on them (and you) for your misapplying the self-same policy, in addition to your fear of being caught WP:CANVASSING, and any other errors that I happen to catch you in. Talk about offensive! And all with the "goody two-shoes, I'm so pure and holier-than-thou" attitude. Makes me gag. I sure as hell could give a shit if you think I work for OSA. Or if you think I am one rude motherfucker." --Justanother 16:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:DR WP:CIVIL WP:NPA User_talk:Justanother/Archive7#Blocked_for_24_hours

"Justanother, I kinda thought you were trying to ridicule my description of your behavior and temper on User_talk:Bishonen#Clue-o-gram_needed which I took as you at least understanding what I said enough to mock it... Anynobody 07:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)"
"No, Anynobody, I was mocking your clueless attack on User:MrDarcy for just doing his job as an admin. Similar to your clueless attack on User:Bishonen for doing her job as an admin. And please don't worry about "kicking me when I am down" as I am hardly down...--Justanother 13:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)"
"Note to all my "friends" (especially you, Anynobody) - unless you are here to unblock me please leave my talk page alone until I am unblocked because I really want to enjoy my time off and it would be pretty rude for you'all to be over here bothering me further before the block is up. As to my real friends, feel free to post here." --Justanother 13:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

(bold in original edit)

[edit] Links and DIFFS to incidents in violation of one or more WP:POLICY and WP:GUIDELINE

WP:DE WP:CIVIL [5] User talk:Anynobody Revision as of 22:16, 2007 March 4

Edit summary: "(→Personal attack on BabyDweezil - Smee, what is with you? Mommy Mommy justanother said a bad word)"
Baiting User:Smee: "Ha ha ha Smee. I see that you do not want to miss any opportunity to interject yourself in the affairs of others. Accusing another editor of editing in bad faith is a PA. End of story. And OH MY GAWD, justanother used a bad word. You just wait til I tell Mom!"

WP:DE WP:CIVIL WP:NPA [6] User talk:Anynobody Revision as of 02:03, 2007 March 5

Edit summary: "(→Personal attack on BabyDweezil - Anynobody is a hypocrite - I'm telling Smee)"
"Now here is an interesting double standard, Anynobody. You object to my, as a third party, warning you about a clear attack against BabyDweezil on an article talk page. Yet you support Smee's 3rd party warning to me when my so-called "attack" was much less clear and was, in fact, a response to an offensive PA by you against me on my own friggin talk page. Double standard, my friend. Hypocrisy."

WP:AGF WP:NPA WP:CIVIL [7] User talk:Anynobody Revision as of 12:45, 2007 March 5

"the only other editors that I have likely "offended" are those that edit offensively; continually reverting valid edits to forward their uninformed POV while continually inserting and reinserting highly POV, non-RS crap ..... You seem to be a special case that is going out of his way to offend me personally by making a big deal out of some WP that we don't see exactly eye-to-eye on and somehow relating that to my fucking religion. You are being offensive. You need to take my religion out of your conversations with me. Until you can manage that you are not welcome to post here. Is that clear?"

(strikethrough in original edit)

WP:AGF WP:NPA WP:CIVIL WP:NPOV [8] User talk:Anynobody Revision as of 22:08, 2007 March 5

"Well, regarding whether I have a COI editing a Scn article, that is ridiculous and smacks of bigotry. Would you deny any other religion, ethnic group, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc., the right to edit in their articles? Of course you would not. So how do you justify to yourself even letting that concept out of the confines of your own skull? That is what I mean. I know that you have both "voices" in there, I just think that you manage to quell the more equitable one. And I have no doubt that you consider yourself the soul of equanimity and justice. So do us both the favor of taking my religion out of the equation and if you want to discuss the merits of my interpretation of that minor issue on the Schwarz article vs. your interpetation and you want to do that in any forum you chose, then please do. Just leave my religion out of it. You won't come out looking good. I can speak without obscenities when I want to and I usually do."

WP:CIVIL WP:AGF [9] User talk:Anynobody Revision as of 06:26, 2007 March 8

"Please review the rules and leave my response section for me and others that agree with me.

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary (meaning your summary, Anynobody, not mine) is biased or incomplete. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section. (That means you and Smee stay out of there.)

Thanks"

WP:CIVIL WP:AGF WP:NPA [10] User talk:Justanother Revision as of 14:23, 2007 March 17

"I do not expect you to figure out the "wall-of-words" though I do think that Orsini is an interesting cat given his next-to-nil editing activity. Obviously, he is not here to edit articles and we see here what effects he is really interested in creating. But again, I would not expect another to involve themselves in this smelly mess. Unfortunately, as a Scientologist of 30 years, I have to do what I can about the propagandizing advocacy and soap-boxing in the Scientology articles along with the gross misundertandings of what Scientology is and how it works."

WP:CIVIL WP:AGF WP:POINT WP:NPA [11] User talk:Justanother Revision as of 06:50, 2007 March 17

Edit summary: "(→Blocked for 24 hours - Tilman said what Tilman said and that is what he meant and the wall of words is just to muddy the waters, i.e. a stratagem)"
"And for Shenme and others, I see that Orsini provides no diffs in that mini wall-of-words, just the promise that if you slog through "Archive 10" then you will figure out that Tilman did not mean what Tilman clearly said. The simple fact is that Tilman has an off-wiki personal animosity towards Schwarz that gives him a clear COI. BabyDweezil called him on it with off-site linkage and I seconded BD. I also removed the WP:BLP violating rant here of Tilman's that is clearly indicative of his COI. His COI prompted Tilman to call for me to be blocked for putting the article up for AfD. That is all the history there is. Me and Tilman get along OK for a member of a religion and a person that actively attempts to blacklist members of that religion and whose government does blacklist them. He just has a COI with Schwarz and allows it to influence him inappropriately, IMO."

(bold added for emphasis)

WP:AGF WP:CIVIL WP:NPA [12] User talk:Justanother Revision as of 04:00, 2007 March 17

Edit summary: "(→Blocked for 24 hours - /support of my claim of misrepresentation)"
"...Orsini has a pattern of misrepresentation..."

WP:AGF WP:CIVIL WP:NPA WP:DE [13] User talk:Bishonen Revision as of 15:28, 2007 March 7

Edit summary: (→Clue needed - The Smee I know is back)

"And finally the false accusation of PA. Smee is back and true to form."

(bold / underline added for emphasis)

WP:AGF WP:CIVIL WP:NPA WP:DE [14] User talk:Bishonen Revision as of 15:30, 2007 March 7

Edit summary: "(→Scared. - Oh MY GAWD. What a drama queen!)"
"OH MY GAWD. What a drama queen! Can someone please please please send him a clue!"
(bold in orginal)

WP:NPAWP:CIVIL WP:DE [15] Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Barbara Schwarz (4th nomination) Revision as of 12:36, 2007 March 13

Edit summary: "(→Munchausen syndrome - new Wikipedia Policy called Assume Mental Illness)"
"Oh, and my psychobabble diagnosis for you is anal expulsive".
(edit reverted at [16] 12:42, 2007 March 13 with edit summary (→Munchausen syndrome - new Wikipedia Policy called Assume Mental Illness - On 2nd thought, I don't want to play))

WP:VANDAL WP:POINT WP:AGF WP:DE [17] Talk:Barbara Schwarz Revision as of 15:51, 2007 February 16

deleting edits by misapplication of policy

[edit] Links and DIFFS to incidents in violation of one or more WP:GUIDELINE

WP:POINT WP:AGF WP:COI [18] User talk:Justanother Revision as of 21:05, 2007 February 14

"this is just another dirty little corner of Wikipedia that I have not much taken an interest in"
"The article should be cut down to what notable parts it may have and then perhaps AfD."
"Re Tilman's editing it. Hmmmm, tough call. My quick read of WP:COI would seem to indicate that he might want to stay away from it but, to be honest, so long as he stays very neutral on it (not taking sides in talk debates), I don't see a problem."

(bold added for emphasis)

WP:POINT WP:DE [[19]] Talk:Barbara Schwarz Revision as of 15:53, 2007 February 16

admission of deleting edits by misapplication of policy: "I pulled it. I think Tilman left about an hour ago. BLP requires immediate removal."

WP:POINT WP:AGF [20] User talk:Anynobody Revision as of 16:34, 2007 March 4

frivolous use of WP:NPA warning to User:Anynobody

[edit] Relevant information on policy

[edit] Abuse of AfD process

Wikipedia:Deletion_Policy#Abuse_of_deletion_process XfD (deletion) processes are not a way to complain or remove material that is personally disliked, whose perspective is against ones beliefs, or which is not yet presented neutrally.

[21] Talk:Barbara Schwarz Revision as of 14:08, 2007 February 20 "....the only real reason she is here is because some editors here have an agenda to discredit Scientology..."

RS needed for "HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 AUGUST 1960"

[edit] Citations from other editors

Please add DIFFS citing evidence of PA, abuse of process, uncivil behavior, etc., in this section. Please follow the format as shown above. Orsini

You actually have some of my citations already listed, so rather than list them here again I simply included a couple of my citations above with yours. Consider the citations as they are now a proposal, if you prefer to separate the citations I have no problem with that. Anynobody 06:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
May I recommend looking at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive209#Attacks and disruption of noticeboards by User:Antaeus Feldspar for examples of Justanother's incivility? I think this diff is particularly telling, as he basically tries to wring sleazy innuendo out of an editor (myself) actually showing patience and attempting to educate a user behaving badly ("Please notice Feldspar's use of the word "our" rather than "your" when describing the trolls claims and opinions".) -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it's a good example, he's done that to several editors and I find that aspect of his behavior perhaps the worst. Anynobody 05:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments from other editors

Please add comments in this section. Please also remember WP policies regarding civility and personal attacks while doing so. Orsini

I also broke down the behavior in question as it relates to policies (more serious), guidelines, and instances where both were violated. Many of his violations are byproducts of another violation, for example because of his religious bias which violates WP:NPOV he has also violated WP:DP and WP:CCC by nominating Barbara Schwarz for the fourth time and his new attempts at a deletion review of the AfD in question. Anynobody 06:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../o/r/s/User_talk%7EOrsini_Sandbox3_5587.html"