User talk:Anonymous 374

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please don't post it in multiple places. It's harassment, and your hiding behind this identity is cowardly. ➔ REDVEЯS knows how Joan of Arc felt 12:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


Welcome!

Hello, Anonymous 374, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! BusterD (talk) 12:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Your post about User:David Shankbone to ANI and User talk:Jimbo Wales

"Please don't post it in multiple places. It's harassment, and your hiding behind this identity is cowardly. ➔ REDVEЯS knows how Joan of Arc felt 12:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)" quoted from the first comment above. BusterD (talk) 13:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

...said the editor posting under a pseudonym, himself chided by a cowardly editor hiding in the shadow of a pen name. BusterD (talk) 12:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Dear Author: please understand that these Wikipedia users are often young and inculcated in some of its unwritten social rules. Words like "harassment" and "coward" get used a great deal more at Wikipedia than in real life. Where you might cc an email to several adult people in an organization or group for their information and without causing offense, at Wikipedia, some people have tried to organize and, if you will, create a strict taxonomy of communication channels whose usage appears orderly. Like most adolescents, they get easily offended when you don't do things their way. This tends to leave a low threshold to trigger driving the quality of conversation down to a adversarial level, despite one of the fundamental tenants of the project being "assume good faith".--Truthnlove (talk) 09:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] shankbone pictures

I have never known David to be unreasonable in regards to his pictures. If you are unhappy with one of his picture I would recommend uploading a picture of your own with greater or equal quality (both in terms of how the subject looks and the size of the picture) under a free license. Removing pictures without replacing them does not help the article. A bad picture is better than no picture. If you need any help with uploading a picture, feel free to contact me on my talk page. Jon513 (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You are not alone

I am the anon IP who has worked to reveal Shankbone's impropriety at the Michael Lucas (porn star) article and elsewhere. I have posted my concerns at several forums in the past in order to achieve the greatest possible audience for my discovery, in the hope that something concrete can be done about Shankbone and his imperiousness. I have posted at your AN/I post today. --72.76.3.104 (talk) 16:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'd appreciate some help from someone, I have been blocked

I posted a long and very good response to the David Shankebone problem on the page Edit conflict: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incid. And someone came and erased it and blocked me. I'd appreciate it if someone could go and repost my response. There was nothing offensive about it. I have a right to defend my point of view. Anonymous 374 (talk) 09:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and here is the response I posted, that got erased:

REDVEЯS, I do not feel my comments are poisonous. Other people agree with me. The "good editor" you describe is often very harsh in his dealings with others and seems to put his own personal pride ahead of common sense when he prevents pictures other than his from being used. As far as I know, most people on Wikipedia conceal their true identities including David Shankbone and yourself. To be called cowardly for merely highlighting the anonymity we all use is ridiculous. You say my criticism of David Shankbone is disgusting. What I find disgusting are his insensitive, uncaring, and simply awful author photos, and the egotistical ways he defends them. And here is my response to you, David Shankbone: There's a difference between attending a public event and expecting a photo to appear for one day in a local newspaper, vs. having that event define your permanent image on a site as widely used as Wikipedia. Your animosity toward authors demonstrates your own lack of a NPOV. Your history with Sharyn November is more complicated than you describe. She at first repeatedly tried to take down the photo you took of her (as anyone can see in the history of her page), and it wasn't until you used intimidation (on a talk page I think, by implying she shouldn't even be writing on her page due to neutral point of view issues and might be blocked) that she immediately backed down and got friendly, clearly out of fear that you would block her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous 374 (talk • contribs) 09:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You have been indefinitely blocked

Because of your history of harassment and trolling, you have been blocked by unanimous consensus at the community. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive377#David Shankbone. Cool Hand Luke 01:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)