User talk:Justinm1978/3

Personal attack
Please stop reverting my attempt to remove the personal attack that an anonymous editor had made against me on Talk:Sigma Alpha Mu. I understand that removing another editors comments is considered controversial, but considering the comment is about me and otherwise unsigned I believe you should leave it to my discretion if I find it to be a personal attack or not. Thank you for your understanding. Alan.ca (talk) 23:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As you continue to revert my removal of the content, I have filed a complaint for outside comment. Wikiquette_alerts Alan.ca (talk) 15:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

(for continuity of discussion reposted from my talk page to here) I understand your feeling, but this isn't a personal attack. Please show how this meets any of the criteria in WP:PA, otherwise you're just censoring a talk page, which isn't kosher by any means. Justinm1978 (talk) 00:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Justin, I don't need a policy to clarify that someone accusing of me of disrupting Wikipedia because I challenged a source for an article is offensive. We are supposed to be discussing the content on Wikipedia and not making allegations about a person's motives.  Such discussions are better held elsewhere and definitely do not contribute to the progress of any article.  If we are to maintain civility here, we must remain focussed on the task, not the people.  There are dedicated areas where a person may make a complaint against an editor.  These places do not accept anonymous complaints. Alan.ca (talk) 14:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine that you do not feel you need a policy, however Wikipedia disagrees with you, hence why they have a policy and the expectation is that users follow it. A talk page is where discussions and comments belong.  Unless this fails WP:CIVIL and WP:PA, it has to remain, no matter how much you dislike it.  Especially in a talk page on a page that you put up for deletion and continued to fight even after consensus went against the deletion.  It looks like in reading the complaint that you filed that others agree with me that it does not fail these policies.  Justinm1978 (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Justin, think about what you're saying here. There was a discussion about content, which ultimately was resolved.  Agreed not all parties were satisfied, but the issue has been put to rest.  An anonymous posting was made, accusing me of acting in bad faith.  I removed the anonymous remark because I felt it was insulting.  Why would you feel keeping this remark on the talk page would in anyway benefit wikipedia if not to further a view point that I am acting maliciously? Alan.ca (talk) 18:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As you seem concerned to have a Wikipedia policy spell out decent manners, I have found Assume good faith for your perusal. Alan.ca (talk) 18:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Guys, this is an edit war worthy of WP:LAME. Alan, as personal attacks go, that one is pretty tame.  Justin, that comment has nothing whatsoever to do with the development of an encyclopedia article and off-topic talk page comments can be removed on demand, particularly when they are addressed at one editor in particular and no response is needed.  But either way, this is about as lame as a thing to argue over. Please stop. --B (talk) 18:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Personal attack
Please stop reverting my attempt to remove the personal attack that an anonymous editor had made against me on Talk:Sigma Alpha Mu. I understand that removing another editors comments is considered controversial, but considering the comment is about me and otherwise unsigned I believe you should leave it to my discretion if I find it to be a personal attack or not. Thank you for your understanding. Alan.ca (talk) 23:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As you continue to revert my removal of the content, I have filed a complaint for outside comment. Wikiquette_alerts Alan.ca (talk) 15:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

(for continuity of discussion reposted from my talk page to here) I understand your feeling, but this isn't a personal attack. Please show how this meets any of the criteria in WP:PA, otherwise you're just censoring a talk page, which isn't kosher by any means. Justinm1978 (talk) 00:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Justin, I don't need a policy to clarify that someone accusing of me of disrupting Wikipedia because I challenged a source for an article is offensive. We are supposed to be discussing the content on Wikipedia and not making allegations about a person's motives.  Such discussions are better held elsewhere and definitely do not contribute to the progress of any article.  If we are to maintain civility here, we must remain focussed on the task, not the people.  There are dedicated areas where a person may make a complaint against an editor.  These places do not accept anonymous complaints. Alan.ca (talk) 14:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine that you do not feel you need a policy, however Wikipedia disagrees with you, hence why they have a policy and the expectation is that users follow it. A talk page is where discussions and comments belong.  Unless this fails WP:CIVIL and WP:PA, it has to remain, no matter how much you dislike it.  Especially in a talk page on a page that you put up for deletion and continued to fight even after consensus went against the deletion.  It looks like in reading the complaint that you filed that others agree with me that it does not fail these policies.  Justinm1978 (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Justin, think about what you're saying here. There was a discussion about content, which ultimately was resolved.  Agreed not all parties were satisfied, but the issue has been put to rest.  An anonymous posting was made, accusing me of acting in bad faith.  I removed the anonymous remark because I felt it was insulting.  Why would you feel keeping this remark on the talk page would in anyway benefit wikipedia if not to further a view point that I am acting maliciously? Alan.ca (talk) 18:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As you seem concerned to have a Wikipedia policy spell out decent manners, I have found Assume good faith for your perusal. Alan.ca (talk) 18:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Guys, this is an edit war worthy of WP:LAME. Alan, as personal attacks go, that one is pretty tame.  Justin, that comment has nothing whatsoever to do with the development of an encyclopedia article and off-topic talk page comments can be removed on demand, particularly when they are addressed at one editor in particular and no response is needed.  But either way, this is about as lame as a thing to argue over. Please stop. --B (talk) 18:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)