User talk:Wjbean
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I am a computer programmer analyst applilcation designer at a Southern California University Institute. I have created a number of web-pages for "fun" and enjoy the sharing of information. I embrace the idea of Wikipedia and hope to contribute on a regular basis as time permits.
[edit] Plea for calm
I am asking you to please to refrain from your aggressive posts towards me. I officially apologize for any mistakes I may have made while editing Wikipedia and ask that you forgive my transgressions. I refer you to WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and especially this page. Dlabtot 00:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Dlabtot: You did not follow proper procedure when flagging the article. This is not the first time you've done this. Since you have done this at least three times that I can see your "plea for calm" rings false. Follow procedure and I'll have nothing to complain about. That is my only beef. William (Bill) Bean 00:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have apologized and asked you to assume good faith on my part. And your response is to come hear and tell me that my words 'ring false'. I'm asking you one last time to stop attacking me. If you persist in your attacks I will have to move towards a more formal process to get you to stop. (I'll crossposted from on my talk page) Dlabtot 00:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Stating fact is not an attack. You have tagged articles without showing cause at least three times. That's not an attack; that's a fact. If you feel a need to formalize this please feel free; however, I have more than enough evidence to assert that you are not acting in good faith. Your call. William (Bill) Bean 01:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Let the "games" begin. William (Bill) Bean 03:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] WP:WQA
Hi there. I'm responding to this post Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#William_.28Bill.29_Bean. I'm not intimately familiar with the history of the incident in question. However, there isn't an excuse for making this sort of personal attack (diff). Even if the editor was in the wrong, responding to a editorial dispute with a personal attack violates policy. Please refrain from this behavior. If you wish to comment, please do so on the WQA board. Thanks. --Bfigura (talk) 02:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Please point out the personal attack or apologize for your error. William (Bill) Bean 03:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Regardless of whether your behavior fits the technical definition of a "personal attack", your comments of late have been incivil, both to Dlabtot and to Bfigura. Demanding that people follow procedure, or make apologies, is not a very good way of interacting with other editors, and not conductive to a pleasant atmosphere. I'd suggest that you refrain from such behavior in the future. >Radiant< 13:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm moving this to the WQA thread. William (Bill) Bean 14:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Cabal's Suck"
On face value a number of the comments against you seemed quite reasonable without knowing fully what has gone on. However, having seen some of the comments directed at me I think I'd have to revise that opinion. I think some of these people read only what they want to and I suspect a couple of the editors might have a closer relationship with "other people" than they should have. --AussieLegend 11:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks AussieLegend. Your opinion is valuable to me. I'm going to do my best to exercise more restraint. That there is a group of people who are consistently there isn't unreasonable. I myself tend to concentrate on articles that are contentious. William (Bill) Bean 16:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
