Bureaucrats, content-moderator, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators, threadmoderator
85,404
edits
User talk:Whoisdrwho: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
→"Stalking"
m (Reverted edits by Whoisdrwho (talk | block) to last version by Mini-mitch) |
|||
| Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
For my point of view, he is not stalking you. He is just checking you editing skills are up scratch. It's what I do when I see a new User. I would encourage that you read our [[Tardis:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] to understand the dos and don'ts of this wiki. All he was doing was giving you a heads-up, so you don't do it again in the future and get yourself in trouble. Remember, we want you to edit here, and it's good your asking if there something bothering you. Keep editing this wiki positively, and you will become a great editor! [[User:Mini-mitch|Mini-mitch]]\[[User talk:Mini-mitch|talk]] 15:19, April 1, 2011 (UTC) | For my point of view, he is not stalking you. He is just checking you editing skills are up scratch. It's what I do when I see a new User. I would encourage that you read our [[Tardis:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] to understand the dos and don'ts of this wiki. All he was doing was giving you a heads-up, so you don't do it again in the future and get yourself in trouble. Remember, we want you to edit here, and it's good your asking if there something bothering you. Keep editing this wiki positively, and you will become a great editor! [[User:Mini-mitch|Mini-mitch]]\[[User talk:Mini-mitch|talk]] 15:19, April 1, 2011 (UTC) | ||
==Audit of your activities relative to [[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revanvolatrelundar]]'s== | |||
Since you didn't specify the causes underlying your charge of "stalking", I've gone through and looked at all of your 40 edits, then checked to see where [[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revanvolatrelundar]] also appeared near you in the edit history. Here, then, are my findings. | |||
Like [[user:mini-mitch|mini-mitch]], above, I find it difficult to substantiate a general charge of "stalking". I, too, have experienced times when editors seem to be following me around and making edits while I am. And it does ''feel'' like a kind of stalking, I'll grant you. What's probably really happening is that your edit is popping up under "Recent Wiki Activity", and other users are just — probably more out of boredom than malicious intent — checking to see what' s just been changed. Don't worry about it. On the other hand, if it does get to the point where you're prevented from editing because someone is changing your last edit while you're making a new one, you might want to send them a message, politely asking that they back off that article for a few minutes. When another editor changes an article before you can save ''your'' revisions, it's called an '''edit conflict'''. And it's, frankly, a pain in the ass. So in that instance, you certainly have the right to politely ask for some space, or to use the {{tl|inuse}} tag. All that said, '''I do not find that stalking has generally occurred.''' | |||
Turning now to more specific edits: | |||
*To anser your initial query at [[Talk:Space (TV story)]], you weren't able to edit the article because your account was still new. See [[Tardis:Protection policy#Protected articles]] for a more precise definition of protection. Revan failed to contribute tot his page, so therefore, nothing to worry about, here. | |||
*[[Talk:Series 6 (Doctor Who)]]: Revan only edits ''before'' you on this page, not after. So there's no stalking here. But your comments on the page — well, I'll talk about them further down. | |||
*[[Doctor Who]]: You're the most recent contributor here, and Revan hasn't been here since 3 Feb. No stalking (let's just abbreviate that NS, cause I'm going to be using it a lot, I think.) | |||
*[[Talk:Doctor Who]]: You're again the most recent contributor. NS. | |||
*[[The Pirate Planet]]: Revan hasn't been there this year. NS. Nobody's touched your contribution yet, but frankly, it's speculation and takes the whole paragraph even further off the topic of ''[[The Pirate Planet]]''. | |||
* [[The Time of Angels]]: You're the latest contributor (YTLC). NS. Revnan not there since 16 Jan. | |||
* [[Susan Foreman]]: Revan has been here after you, but he didn't touch your contribution. NS. | |||
* [[UNIT]]: YTLC. NS. | |||
* [[Roswell]]. Yes, Revan edited after you. But it's hardly stalking, since you put up the {{tl|delete}} flag, which is effectively like waving the bat-signal in front of an admin. Same sort of thing at [[Roswell crash]] and the related talk pages. I suppose you could question whether Revan erred with respect to our [[tardis:deletion policy|deletion policy]], since he removed the delte tag without discussion. On the other hand, I don't disagree with his decision. We ''should'' have separate articles about the town and the crash. And, he took your views into consideration when he subsequently edited the two articles so as to give better differentiation between the two. This is what you wanted, so I don't think this is at all a case of "stalking" or admin abuse. | |||
* You also had some forum edits and talk page edits, but I won't consider those in this review. | |||
====Series 6==== | |||
At the end of the day, though the main bone of contention, it seems to me, is the near edit war at [[Series 6 (Doctor Who)]]. And here there some legitimate gripes on your parts, as well as an error or two that ''you'' made. The big thing that I see is that you were trying to strip the article of some of its doctorwhospoilers.com references. This was a good thing, and something of which I, and the manual of style, approve. '''You were definitely, unambiguously, in the right.''' I don't think Revan was being malicious by reverting your edits; I just think this was at a point when I had just blown the whistle on doctorwhospoilers.com and he may not have made it to the forums yet. I'm sure he thought that doctorwhospoilers.com was a valid source and that he was reerting your removal of something that had a valid source attached to it. I think you did precisely the right thing by backing off just before the tussle ended in an edit war. | |||
Where I think you could have helped the situation a little more was to be clearer in your comments on the talk page. it wasn't at all obvious from your comments what the edit war was about. You should have pulled out an example of the thing you were trying to remove from the article and explained why you thought it wasn't appropriate. | |||
You should also have avoided language which made it appear as though you were attacking him for abuse of admin powers. Yes, I understand that he did mention banning you, but this was well after you raised the tension on the series 6 talk page by asking for admin help. In this whole dispute, you never went to his talk page just to discuss the substance and merits of what you were trying to edit. Instead, you went directly from his reversion of your edits to "omg, he's abusing his admin powers by reverting me!" The middle step of "Hey, dude. Here's why I made my edit, why don't we talk about it for a bit?" is an awfully important one to skip over. | |||
To reiterate, '''I find your edits at [[Series 6 (Doctor Who)]] to have been helpful, well-intentioned, and perfectly proper.''' Where you went wrong was in thinking that Revan had something personal against you. As I've demonstrated by careful review of your edits, '''series 6 is the ''only'' place where he's directly contradicted your edits.''' And I'm convinced he was acting in what he believed was good faith, as were you. | |||
There's simply been a misunerstanding here. That might be because the only time you spoke with him directly was when you were convinced he was stalking him. If you had explained your editing on his talk page, which you never really did, I feel sure that you would have found Revan reasonable, and you would have worked to a common goal. After all, he demonstrated on his [[Roswell]] / [[Roswell crash]] edits that he was listening to your issues. Try to remember in future that while revision notes (the summaries that you include before you save your articles) are things that should be included, they aren't a terribly effective way of carrying on a conversation with someone. So while you did leave notes in the history, it's entirely possible that Revan never saw them. Far better to leave emssages directly on user or article talk pages. | |||
I noticed while I was typing this that you blanked your talk page and appear to have left our community. I reverted your talk page, in part because you technically don't have a right to do delete discussions on this wiki, but mostly because I hope you'll decide to come back. Your edits have been generally good ones so far. We could certainly use you in the future, especially as the new series begins. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''18:38:33 Fri '''01 Apr 2011 </span> | |||
