User:Rationalobserver/sandbox2

Teaching me
I'd like to make a point about comprehending Wikipedia conventions. I used to play basketball, in fact I was pretty darn good, and had there been a WNBA all those years ago I would have went pro. One of my favorite players was Larry Bird, and in the early-1980s I attended a b-ball clinic hosted by the Celtics that featured him. He taught us his philosophy of the game, and one major point was about passing, which I loved to do as a player. Bird said that when you pass the ball it is solely your responsibility that the person you are passing to gets the pass. He didn't accept any excuses by passers for dropped balls, even if an easy pass was missed. It's idealistic, but as an educator I take that approach to teaching. I would never excuse poor marks from a class by suggesting the students weren't smart enough. I take the blame, and the buck stops with me.

I feel that some of the things you've tried to explain to me were a bit too complicated for my limited background in the relevant polices, but all misunderstands have been categorically blamed on me and my lack of comprehension skills. There have also been a few things that you were quite wrong about, but I haven't ever seen you acknowledge that, except that I am not ILT, which was painfully obvious to many people who looked at the SPI. I am not an idiot, in fact my intelligence is well above average, but I admit that some of these Wikipedia concepts have alluded me thus far, and I have made some mistakes with applying advice and getting along with the different cliques here. But Irataba is the first article I ever wrote, and I think for a beginner it's pretty good – I fully acknowledge that without the help of several more experienced and talented people if wouldn't be that great, but this is a collaborative project, so I take pride in the teamwork. Before me, there was no Irataba article on Wikipedia, and I am proud to have started it. Rationalobserver (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Appearance of tag-teaming
Can you see why I might be paranoid about your newfound desire to help me, when you and at least two others who are involved in the FAC were trying to get me banned at SPI just 6 weeks ago? Can you see how this might look like you and your friends are trying to make my life difficult? Rationalobserver (talk) 20:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC) Some specific examples:
 * Victoria: "Add more stuff about the importance of dreams in Mohave life.
 * FAC reviewer: "What's with all this stuff about dreams?"


 * Victoria: "We need more background and context"
 * FAC reviewer: "There is too much background material in the article"


 * Victoria: "We need more material devoted to the governmental system"
 * FAC reviewer: "There is way too much about Mohave government, so trim it"


 * Victoria: "We need more detail about Olive Oatman"
 * FAC reviewer: "Why is there so much stuff about Oatman, and how does she even relate to Irataba?"

There are many, many more examples, and the diffs are not hard to find. In fact, looking at your peer review it would seem that you and the FAC reviewer are of completely different minds about what to include and what to focus on, and they would absolutely disagree with your approach to writing the article. It also looks like this might be a two-way attack where you suggest we add stuff that they later oppose and demand we remove, causing further exhaustion. I'm not accusing you here, really, but if we are going to talk this out let's not leave things unsaid. Rationalobserver (talk) 20:39, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Topics
I see that you've expressed an interest and knowledge of Arizona tribes, but which pages had you edited prior to February 15? Because I don't see any evidence that you've ever edited a single page to do with Native Americans prior to your accusing me of being a sock. Can I expect your presence at any and all Mohave articles I improve in the future? Are you willing to allow me to work on stuff without your help, or have you gone from "I don't want to help anymore" to "you have no choice but to accept my help wherever you go" without any interim discussion with me? I wish you had just asked if I would accept an Irataba peer review, because I would have, but the way you came in at the last minute with piles of concerns looked like an attempt to exhaust me at the end of an already long and in-depth peer review. Rationalobserver (talk) 20:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC) Can you see though that this is yet another suggestion that involves complicated aspects of Wikipedia policy that I am likely to mess up? At my stage of learning I don't want to put lots of effort uploading copyrighted images and writing FURs when PD ones are available. It far better for me to play it safe on images, and I am frustrated that you don't see it that way. That's why you seem like a saboteur who is trying to make everything more difficult. Rationalobserver (talk) 19:51, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Another example was the Kroeber 1925 source, that you had issues with but neglected to follow-up after I explained away your concerns on February 24. Rationalobserver (talk) 19:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Honestly though, I am so over RBP that I won't be making any more edits to it. It's a lightning rod for criticism and tag-teaming, and I couldn't care less what happens to that article now. Rationalobserver (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC) The point still stands though, that the last I talked with you, you said you didn't want to help me, but then you came out to participate at the Irataba PR without any intervening discussion with me. So that seemed like a weird kind of lurking, when you seem to follow my every move but won't even talk to me like a person. Rationalobserver (talk) 20:08, 2 April 2015 (UTC)