User talk:Dario D.: Difference between revisions

Warning: AGF, NPA, POV, etc. - please do not contentiously re-insert inappropriate content

Vis-a-vis WP:AGF, WP:NPA, WP:V, WP:POV, etc., please do not make edits like this one. Not only are you re-inserting material that is clearly inappropriate to Wikipedia, by calling for me to be "banned" you are making a personal attack as well. Please familiarize yourself with the policies and guidelines of this project, and do not insert poorly sourced derogatory material, material contradicted by the citations, editorial comments, and personal attacks in the mainspace (articles). Thanks, Wikidemo (talk) 10:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Note - the identical material was just contentiously added by User:68.111.164.208, with a similarly worded threat in the edit summary. I have left a "second warning" for the editor at that talk page based on these edits:[1][2][3]. Wikidemo (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Third warning

Immediately before filing the bogus arbitration case, you made this series of edits. I have removed these agan, of course. Again, do not keep adding original research to Wikipedia to support your point of view against this organization. Also, do not WP:NPA personally attack other Wikipedians anywhere, and certainly not in the text of an article. I hope that those who review the arbitration case will set you straight, but if you persist in this contentious conduct you will likely be blocked. Wikidemo (talk) 01:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply by Dario D.:

Warn me more, I beg thee! Everyone loves a Wikipedia user "warning" another. Oh, I am feeling so warned! Maybe I should consider the "warning" and allow you to keep deleting the criticism section! Let me think about that for a second... okay... NOT!

Fourth warning

For this edit. At this point you are edit warring, taunting, and appear to simply be misbehaving. I don't know what your game is but this is not a playground. I will ask that you be blocked now. Wikidemo (talk) 02:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply by Dario D.

You are hilarious. Reply to my post in the article Talk section before assuming you have more right than I do to carry on an Edit war, while doing the exact same thing you're accusing me of. Except there is a key difference: I'm citing valid Criticisms of the Webby Awards, and you're deleting them without a reason. I listed 5 reasons that I put to you to debunk.

Reply by Wikidemo:

Your edits are bogus. You are misbehaving. You have every right to contribute valid edits and to behave yourself but you are not. Please stop now. Wikidemo (talk) 02:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply by Dario D.

You're absolutely right. My edits are bogus. I don't know why or how, because you never mention, but maybe if I agree with you, you'll stop accusing me, and say something that is backed by reasoning, and not pure, unadultered accusation.

Arbitration process

The arbitration process is the last step in dispute resolution, not the first. I note that you have not even discussed with User:Wikidemo about the article at Talk:Webby Awards. At Wikipedia, the process is usually "be bold" and edit, revert, discuss - thus starting the process of dispute resolution.

Arbitration is not a complaints desk - it is for when all avenues of WP:DR are exhausted. x42bn6 Talk Mess 00:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the comment you made on the arbitration case: Simple, discuss with this user. I note the user has already made some points on why the section may not be warranted at Talk:Webby Awards#Repeated insertions of inappropriate POV content so that should be your starting point. Could I also request you remove that part from the arbitration request? That section is meant to be for arbitrators to remark in, not for other parties, involved or otherwise. x42bn6 Talk Mess 01:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply by Dario D.:

Please see my reply to that: Link: Talk:Webby Awards#Repeated insertions of inappropriate POV content

That user essentially kicked up a cloud of fluff. I don't know how you gathered that anything concrete was brought up in the slightest - I'm assuming you skimmed over it very, very briefly. Please read it carefully, because it will help reverse your position on this, along with my reply to it. My position is very simple: Wikidemo has been deleting the Criticisms without hesitation for days, hovers over the article like a fly over dung, and hasn't stated a single reason WHY the citations are invalid. Not one. Somehow he/she assumes that it is all worth deleting, without any explanation.

I have no opinion on the criticism section. User:Wikidemo listed his reasons there and those are his reasons for removing the section. I do think the questions you asked after he put the reasons down are answered by what he, well, put down in the first place, though. x42bn6 Talk Mess 02:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

For sake of simplicity, I'll cite one of Wikidemo's complaints. He says, "who added the false assertion that Scambusters.org also claims the Webbies is a scam. That source says the exact opposite of what the editor purports it to say, and discredits the claim: "a few legitimate sites that do charge entry fees, most notably the Webby Awards."[4]", and the source does say that exactly:

... NOTE: The below article was written in January 1998. At the time, we knew of no legitimate sites that charged entry fees. In the interim, there are now a few legitimate sites that do charge entry fees, most notably the Webby Awards. ...

I suggest you try and work with him rather than against him on this, and then use arbitration only if everything else fails. x42bn6 Talk Mess 02:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello Dario - I just saw your request for arbitration, and I feel obliged to warn you that it is almost certain to be rejected by the Arbitration Committee as premature. There are still quite a few steps in the dispute resolution process before it reaches arbitration (third opinion, request for comment, mediation, etc.) This is just advice that you're free to take or ignore (I'm entirely unconnected with the Arbitration Committee), but I'd suggest that you withdraw your arbitration request in favour of one of these other methods. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not technical enough or time-gifted enough to slog through even MORE crap with Wikidemo, especially considering how poor his/her argument is. I will most certainly not retract my complaint. - By the way, I posted that article like 5 seconds ago. How do YOU already know about it? - Arbitrators, if you're reading this, please check the IP of Sarcasticidealist and Wikidemo, and see if they match.