Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Quizimodo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Formatting of RFC 2 Civility 3 Moved History to Description 4 This RfC

[edit] Formatting of RFC

There are some problems with how this RFC is formatted; could the certifiers go through and edit the page to better-comply with the prescribed format (i.e. filling in all of the sections at the top)? Sarcasticidealist (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Under which section, does one co-certify? GoodDay (talk) 02:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

"Users certifying the basis for this dispute". Sarcasticidealist (talk) 02:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

Discussion should be conducted with a certain degree of dignity and respect. Sure, occasionally we'll drop a heated remark. I think most people could forgive or suffer that and I believe reasonable people would apologise for that. But it makes it very difficult to have a discussion when a user uses offensive remarks habitually. That's a different matter. I don't know what he's doing? Is he deliberately being offensive to try and force others out of the discussion? He has removed my notices from his talk page with contempt. He either does not realise he's behaving like a jerk, or he does know and doesn't care. Quizimodo, all we are asking you to do is to be civil.--Gazzster (talk) 23:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moved History to Description

You may wish to add signatures to your postings, Gazzter. I've added considerably more incidents to the request for comment. --soulscanner (talk) 06:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad someone else has recognised his attitude, subtle as it may be. Quizimodo has indicated to Sarcasticidealist that he does not wish any contact with me. As I indicated, if that means I can edit Dominion and participate in discussions without having to talk with him and suffer his immaturity, that's fine with me. My principal concern was that he was obstructing discussion at that article. Now he hasn't visited Dominion since I posted a Wikiquette alert. And we have since been able to have protection lifted. So I really have nothing more to pursue from this RFC. If he does continue his attitude I would have to rethink that. And I suggest we keep the RFC open until you have some sort of closure for your complaint.--Gazzster (talk) 07:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This RfC

I was asked to comment on this matter through a note on my talk page, but I don't think I can actually participate. Unfortunately, I do not feel that I am sufficiently aware of the different positions, or even the nature of the dispute itself. Apologies, and best of luck for a quick resolution. --Ckatz^chat_spy 05:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)