BrownHairedGirl (talk | contribs) →Unblock and a suggestion: hmmmmmmm |
Kittybrewster (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 53:
:I disagree that there was a consensus to unblock, but I said I wouldn't wheelwar, so I'll let the lifting stand. But [[WP:COI]] still applies. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|BrownHairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 19:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
==My help==
I am actually very happy indeed to assist in sorting out any issues on any of "my" articles (however we define that). Subject to a couple of conditions. Namely I sort it with particular editors whom I believe to be civil and unharrassing and fair. I will post on this page (only) any answers and sources to any questions. Anyone can check or AGF or transfer data - which is up to them. They can raise any questions they like. But I won't cooperate with impatience or incivility. My thinking is that I have always agreed to do this provided the articles are highlighted one at a time or more slowly than they have been. If a bunch go to afd together, I simply can't cope. I am invited and encouraged to help and then accused of COI when I try. Forget that - it is a bad game which I'm not playing. So I invite Tyrenius, Squeakbox, Catchpole, Gustav, Hemlock Martinis, Waltonmonarchist, Choess, Durin, Tryde, Alci12, Proteus, MrDarcy and Laura1822 to work with me on this. No yapping at me from the sidelines by unconstructive fact or nn tags from other people. They can approach me through one of the civil editors. - [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]]<small>[[User_talk:Kittybrewster| (talk)]]</small> 02:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
===Isotope23===
Thank you for expanding the DNB edit. But you lost the exact date of death which is the same in Memories and DNB, namely the latter day of the month. - [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]]<small>[[User_talk:Kittybrewster| (talk)]]</small> 02:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
|
Revision as of 02:57, 1 June 2007
Your block
I make no comment on the justification of your block. However, you may not be aware that it is possible to appeal against it. See details here Template:Unblock. When you are unblocked I am quite prepared to work with you and help you see the best way forward for your Arbuthnot pages. I understand this must be difficult for you but a solution does have to be found. Giano 08:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- To my mind the block was quite inappropriate. I have never seen a COI tag on an edit and although the cavalry officer shares my name he is incredibly distant and there is no COI at all. He is table I while I am Table L (see [1]). But I have no plans to appeal nor to use this account again. Because it has all become too personal and nothing is being done about the stalking and the incivility. I will return when MrDarcy returns. Do what you like with articles I have contributed to. I am not that fussed. - Kittybrewster (talk) 10:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Illegitimi non carborundum. I hope you return soon :-) Craigy (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- I too. Unfortunate, to say the least, that you have been bullied to the extent you have. I am preparing something on all this which I propose to place before Jimbo Wales. David Lauder 17:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps the arbcom would be more appropriate? SqueakBox 20:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello Kittybrewster. I too hope that you return soon. The actions of some editors towards you have been disgraceful. I find it hard to understand how you can stay so calm and polite despite this. Hopefully this will soon be over and you can focus on something constructive on Wikipedia again. Tryde 20:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I've replied to your email. WaltonAssistance! 13:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Blocked again, another COI violation
You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy by (see explanation below). If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org.
After this edit of another article on a person identified as a member of you family (in breach of WP:COI), I have imposed a further block on you. You have been repeatedly warned to observe WP:COI, and you will be aware that your failure to do so has been widely criticised at WP:ANI and elsewhere (see, for example WP:ANI#Vendetta): it is therefore a form of disruptive editing
Because this follows so soon after a previous block for the same problem, I have set this block with a duration of 7 days. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- How the hell is it CoI to edit an article on someone with one's surname, who died 150 years ago! --Counter-revolutionary 17:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Because Kittybewster regards this person as a member of his own family, about whom he has craeted dozens of articles on non-notable people, relying in most cases on sources owned by KB. See my reply to the discussion at WP:ANI#User:Giano_II ignoring WP:CONSENSUS. -BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Does he regard him as a member of his family? I have seen Kittybrewster comment that he has no relation to certain Arbuthnots. If editing the article on someone with the same surname as one is CoI then, logically, it must be CoI for human beings to edit the Human being article...that, of course, would be a nonsense. --Counter-revolutionary 18:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Because Kittybewster regards this person as a member of his own family, about whom he has craeted dozens of articles on non-notable people, relying in most cases on sources owned by KB. See my reply to the discussion at WP:ANI#User:Giano_II ignoring WP:CONSENSUS. -BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Or for me to edit the Gary Weiss article, SqueakBox 18:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Why's that? It says on your user page your name is Richard! haha! --Counter-revolutionary 18:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Or for me to edit the Gary Weiss article, SqueakBox 18:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Kitty wasnt forced to say who he is, none of us are, his honesty shouldnt be held against him and I agree that this doesnt look like COI to me, SqueakBox 19:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Counter-revolutionary asks whether KB regards Thomas Arbuthnot as member of his family. Yes, because when he created the article, he categorised it under Category:Arbuthnot family; and the Arbuthnot family website agrees: www.arbuthnott.com/book9.htm. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- FWIW, until recently the category also included a battleship, a fictional character and a Canadian town — I think the category as Kittybrewster intended it was more a Category:Things with "Arbuthnot" in the article name than his family tree — iridescenti (talk to me!) 21:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Um, looking at that edit, how can it be a conflict of interest to refer to the DNB? (I am assuming that this particular fact is verified by the DNB, of course, and it would be useful to add a <references> tag too...) -- 21:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- There is some discussion of this block at ANI, although the discussion hasn't really advanced very far, perhaps because Kittybrewster has not (yet?) posted an unblock request. Newyorkbrad 22:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- What I think is that there is no such thing as Clan Arbuthnott but there is such a thing as an Arbuthnot family - because it is lowland rather than highland. Some Wikipedians however don't know the difference and preserve an article with the wrong title even though they have been advised differently. And the family or category embraces everybody and everything who / which chooses to acknowledge the family in any way, including people such as Malcolm Arbuthnot who chose to use it but was born a Parsons and ships, roads, places named after people with the name. That does not create a conflict of interest. Not all Arbuthnots re related. Does BHG bar herself from editing articles about Brown haired girls or women in general? Should she do so? Ridiculous. Should NewYorkBrad bar himself from editing articles on New York related subjects? Ludicrous. I think if BHG wants to argue that I am being disruptive then she should explain how and where the COI arises. I simply don't see it. I cannot appeal her appalling judgment. I simply don't understand her thinking in arriving at it. If I understood it, maybe I could respond to it. I would like to understand it with appropriate references to WP:COI. Does BHG desist from editing articles named Smith (if her name is Smith)?? Or does she think I own the copyright of the Dictionary of National Biography? Oh, I do wish it were so. - Kittybrewster (talk) 22:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- This is enough to try the patience of a saint - YOU are one of the chief editors of Clan Arbuthnott [2] people are spending hours and hours trying to unravel the mess you have created. Now you say there is no such thing as a page you have been heavily editing. Streuth! Giano 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- What I think is that there is no such thing as Clan Arbuthnott but there is such a thing as an Arbuthnot family - because it is lowland rather than highland. Some Wikipedians however don't know the difference and preserve an article with the wrong title even though they have been advised differently. And the family or category embraces everybody and everything who / which chooses to acknowledge the family in any way, including people such as Malcolm Arbuthnot who chose to use it but was born a Parsons and ships, roads, places named after people with the name. That does not create a conflict of interest. Not all Arbuthnots re related. Does BHG bar herself from editing articles about Brown haired girls or women in general? Should she do so? Ridiculous. Should NewYorkBrad bar himself from editing articles on New York related subjects? Ludicrous. I think if BHG wants to argue that I am being disruptive then she should explain how and where the COI arises. I simply don't see it. I cannot appeal her appalling judgment. I simply don't understand her thinking in arriving at it. If I understood it, maybe I could respond to it. I would like to understand it with appropriate references to WP:COI. Does BHG desist from editing articles named Smith (if her name is Smith)?? Or does she think I own the copyright of the Dictionary of National Biography? Oh, I do wish it were so. - Kittybrewster (talk) 22:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- The community has given feedback to Kittybrewster on several occasions regarding conflicts of interest, including comments in AfDs, threads on AN/I, and even a posting on the COI noticeboard. If the user is still unaware of how a COI could exist then it appears to be wilfull ignorance. I had proposed the mild remedies of stopping editing articles about his immediate family and stopping using his own websites are sources. Kittybrewster never responded and other editors have since pushed for a more complete ban on the editng of Arbuthnot-related articles. Even so the user continues to deny there is any problem with his editing. A seven-day block is a harsh response, but I don't know of a way to better convey to the editor that the community does not approve of his behavior. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 02:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Kittybrewster, please please please read WP:COI. Honestly, read it. It repeatedly refers to members of one's own family, and urges editors in that situation to refrain from editing such articles. In your case, there is not simply the fact of whatever family relationship you have to the subject, but the fact that you maintain and own copyright to the material which you repeatedly cite as sources, and that you have opposed every attempt to apply notability tests to the articles which you have created.
It really is a bit rich for you accuse me of having exercised "appalling judgment", and to argue about whether a particular person is too distant a relative to be covered by WP:COI. For goodness sake, you even used Wikipedia to create your own autobiographical article, and at no point have you ever acknowledged it this was a clear breach of WP:COI. So far as I can see, you pay no attention whatsoever to either the letter or the spirit of WP:COI, so please spare us the quibbling about its margins: at best, such quibbling amounts to gaming the system.
If you want to avoid CoI problems, the solution is very simple and should be very clear to you: do not edit or participate in XfD discussions on articles relating to your family or to the people identified on your genealogy website as your relatives.
As to my own restraint, yes I do indeed refrain from editing articles or creating related to people who share my own unusual surname, other than uncontroversial recategorisation. Several of my direct ancestors are clearly notable, and my great-grandfather was a notable scientist with a substantive DNB entry, but sadly has no article on wikipedia. Looking at the picture of his widow which hangs on my wall and the pile of family papers in my cupboard, I find it sad that there is no article on him ... but WP:COI] exists for a very good reason, so I will neither create nor edit an article on him. Similarly, I myself clearly meet the WP:N criteria for a biographical article, and there are dozens of references available to confirm that fact if someone else bothered to write it or agreed that my own marginal significance in the world was an encyclopedic matter; but I have actually read WP:AUTO, so I have not only refrained from writing an autobiographical article myself, but have also discouraged friends from acting as meatpuppets on my behalf. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)- First let me apologise for accusing you of appalling judgment. A heat of the moment comment which will soon be blanked. You rarely make that error. What I should have said is that I disagreed with your judgment. I also wish we had an article on your great grandfather who is clearly notable. I see nothing wrong with somebody taking salient facts from DNB and writing something up provided it is not a straight transcript. I think there is something here that I just don't follow. Incidentally I think it might be checking "1911" for the notable Thomas Arbuthnot. And while I am under a cloud, can I ask whether it would be acceptable for ssomeone to put a tricolour with the label "sectarian rag" under it as is on Vintagekits user page? - Kittybrewster (talk) 09:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'd think so! --Counter-revolutionary 11:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Kittybrewster, I'm not going to get dragged into further personalised arguments (and since Vintagekits seems to have given up goading you, it's a pity that you can't be WP:CIVIL in return), but I do want to respond to your point about "taking salient facts from DNB and writing something up provided it is not a straight transcript". Wikipedia:Copyrights is useful here, as is WP:RS. The situation as I understand it is that an article should draw on multiple sources, and that simply paraphrasing a source is unlikely to be acceptable; what is required is a synthesis of multiple sources, at least two of which should be non-trivial. Additionally, WP:COI still applies, so I would regard it as unacceptable for me to create an article on my great-grandfather regardless of how many independent reliable sources were available. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'd think so! --Counter-revolutionary 11:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- First let me apologise for accusing you of appalling judgment. A heat of the moment comment which will soon be blanked. You rarely make that error. What I should have said is that I disagreed with your judgment. I also wish we had an article on your great grandfather who is clearly notable. I see nothing wrong with somebody taking salient facts from DNB and writing something up provided it is not a straight transcript. I think there is something here that I just don't follow. Incidentally I think it might be checking "1911" for the notable Thomas Arbuthnot. And while I am under a cloud, can I ask whether it would be acceptable for ssomeone to put a tricolour with the label "sectarian rag" under it as is on Vintagekits user page? - Kittybrewster (talk) 09:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Kittybrewster, please please please read WP:COI. Honestly, read it. It repeatedly refers to members of one's own family, and urges editors in that situation to refrain from editing such articles. In your case, there is not simply the fact of whatever family relationship you have to the subject, but the fact that you maintain and own copyright to the material which you repeatedly cite as sources, and that you have opposed every attempt to apply notability tests to the articles which you have created.
Unblock and a suggestion
I'm unblocking you per a discussion on WP:ANI where it appears the consensus is that a 1 week block was a bit excessive here. I want to strongly suggest that you take a break from editing Arbuthnot articles for a while. It appears there are a set of editors who support you in regards to these articles and a set of editors who do not, but there is a wider community of editors out there who are essentially neutral and it appears to me that you are quickly wearing out the patience and good faith of that wider community of editors. It might be a good time to chill out for a bit and disengage.--Isotope23 14:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree that there was a consensus to unblock, but I said I wouldn't wheelwar, so I'll let the lifting stand. But WP:COI still applies. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
My help
I am actually very happy indeed to assist in sorting out any issues on any of "my" articles (however we define that). Subject to a couple of conditions. Namely I sort it with particular editors whom I believe to be civil and unharrassing and fair. I will post on this page (only) any answers and sources to any questions. Anyone can check or AGF or transfer data - which is up to them. They can raise any questions they like. But I won't cooperate with impatience or incivility. My thinking is that I have always agreed to do this provided the articles are highlighted one at a time or more slowly than they have been. If a bunch go to afd together, I simply can't cope. I am invited and encouraged to help and then accused of COI when I try. Forget that - it is a bad game which I'm not playing. So I invite Tyrenius, Squeakbox, Catchpole, Gustav, Hemlock Martinis, Waltonmonarchist, Choess, Durin, Tryde, Alci12, Proteus, MrDarcy and Laura1822 to work with me on this. No yapping at me from the sidelines by unconstructive fact or nn tags from other people. They can approach me through one of the civil editors. - Kittybrewster (talk) 02:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Isotope23
Thank you for expanding the DNB edit. But you lost the exact date of death which is the same in Memories and DNB, namely the latter day of the month. - Kittybrewster (talk) 02:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)