User talk:Anittas/ArchiveIV

Khotyn

Hi Anittas. Khotyn is now unprotected. You can participate in the discussions at Talk:Khotyn about how to make the article more NPOV. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 09:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Satem

these are times long before there was any "Romania", or even "Dacia". Satem influence is assumed because Albanian is a Satem language, and because Greek, although being Centum, shows tendencies of palatalization. The map is intended to give a rough idea, of course, nobody can draw a detailed map of Europe 4000 years ago. dab (ᛏ) 12:33, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Image:Vlad-draculea.JPG

You can;t just scan an image from a book and claim it isn't copyrighted. That's not how copyright works, and it's not how Wikipedia works either. DreamGuy 17:06, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Did you read my entire description? The book is from Communist times and it is not copyrighted. --Anittas 21:59, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked for 24 hours, due to your violation of the three-revert rule on Khotyn. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. —David Levy 18:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

:) La Mulţi Ani Anittas! --219.95.65.250 11:19, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. The same to you. --Anittas 07:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Churchill

I was reverting the edit before yours. Sorry for the confusion. Proteus (Talk) 11:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Moldova

Salut. D-le, de ce faci ceea, ce stii bine ca nu e bine? Care e scopul tau? User:Serhio

La ce te referi, domnul Serhio? Am spus cumva un neadevar? --Anittas 11:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

De ce bagi pe gat Romania? serhio ^talk 12:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Pentru ca oameni ca Node spune ca noi suntem un popor diferit, vorbim limbi diferite. Mai bine il ei pe el de ureche, nu pe mine. --Anittas 12:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

De ce mi-ai editat pagina? Cu asha un comportament ca al vostru, eu incep sa inclin spre aceea, ca Node avea dreptate. :( serhio ^talk 12:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Am facuto mai atractiva. Tu deja erai de partea lui Node. --Anittas 12:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Vad ca iti place sa iti bati joc de oameni. Imi pare rau. Moldovenii de la noi nu fac atata galagie din relatiile noastre. Da, sunt unii nationalishti care din cadn in cand foarte palid shi foarte rar incearca sa vb despre relatiile noastre, insa la nivel de popor, Romania demult pierduse shansele la o eventuala unire cu Moldova. Rasuflu ushurat cand ma gandesc ca am pastrat independentza shi suveranitatea, deoarece, sa zicem, alternativa era foarte neplacuta, shi comportamentul Romanilor atat fatza de cetatenii din Republica Moldova, cu atat mai mult de cetatenii Romani din regiunea Moldovei Romaneshti, este ... respingator! :( serhio ^talk 12:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Esti un tradator! Sterge-o de aici! --Anittas 12:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

In ceea ce priveshte tradarea nationala, cred ca aici Romania(shi deci, romanii), ar trebui sa se exprime foarte atent, mai ales in ceea ce priveshte Basarabia :(( serhio ^talk 15:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Churchill, again

Sorry, I should have written 'partial revert', because some of the commas and other edits (such as hyphenations) were indeed in the correct place. The initial commas looked to be misplaced, as they broke up the flow of the sentence and made the style very 'choppy': a sentence reads better if it is not broken up into small phrases. The later edits seemed correct, and it would perhaps have been easier to just edit on top of yours.

If you compare the versions, most of the commas I removed were after the initial phrase of a sentence which set the event at a certain date. It is for these cases that I felt that breaking the sentences at this point would make the style very repetitive.

For the 'Graduating ...'/'After graduating ...' change, the reason that I removed the 'after' was because the two events are interlinked and one is a natural consequence of the other. At Sandhurst, you are already part of the army and just undergoing officer training, so the phrase is constructed to let you know that he became an officer at 21. (Actually, the sentence is probably still wrong and I should have changed the 'joined' to 'took up a posting' or something.) The website that you supplied looks really useful, and if I was to choose one of the options listed as the basis for restructuring the sentence, it would probably be the last. Maybe make the sentence read 'He took a posting as a subaltern ... on graduating from Sandhurst at the age of 21.'

In the sentence "Churchill also devoted his time to educating himself ...", the 'to' refers to 'his time': you could change it to "Churchill spent his time in educating himself ..." where the 'in' now refers to 'Churchill'. The end of the sentence "... from books which he had sent out" is equally confusing, because you are not sure if he had sent the books out before he went out to India, or if he had had them sent out to India by someone else while he was already there.

In general, I agree that the whole thing is a mess and well done for taking the effort to try and improve it. I hope I am not talking down to you: I noticed that you were Romanian from your talk page, and so I thought you would appreciate a more detailed explanation. English is very confusing because there are too many options to choose from. Cheers, User:Noisy | Talk 13:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the website that I posted clarified about the dangling modifiers, and that's why I think that it might be wrong to start the sentence with the word "Graduating". I think that if you want to use the "to" in the sentence about Churchill reading books, it should read like this:

'Churchill also devoted his time to educate himself from books which he had sent out', instead of as we have now, "Churchill also devoted his time to educating himself from books which he had sent out". Maybe I'm reading it wrong.

I also disagree with you removing these commas:

While in the Sudan[,] Churchill participated in the battle of Omdurman[,] the last British cavalry charge in battle.

By October 1898[,] he had returned to Britain and begun work on the 2 volume The River War[,] published in 1899.

I think those commas should be restored, as well as the rest of the commas that were used after a date. Perhaps we should ask someone more qualified, such as an English professor. --Anittas 13:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I have responded on my talk page. Cheers, User:Noisy | Talk 17:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Rape of the Sabine Women

Maybe you should review the above mentioned "rape". The Sabines later married their Roman abductors. In fact, the Latin word "rapere" translates to "abduct." Have a look at http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sabine+rape&btnG=Google+Search Cyberevil 04:24, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Sigh, I can only assume you are a tad ignorant of Roman mythology. The quote from Britannica only proves my point. No offense meant! Cyberevil 04:27, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

The Romans requested neighbouring Sabines to let them marry some of their women but they were refused. The Romans then invited all their neighbours to a huge religious celebration in honour of Neptune. And they came, men, women and children. In the middle of the party, the younger Romans rushed in and carried off the Sabine women who were then raped to ensure the production of offspring.

http://www.liveandlearn.com.au/Dawn/50/Women%20and%20War%204%20Sabine.html --Anittas 04:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

The woman who compiled the essay on the link you provided misunderstood the term just as you did. I also advised you to use Google to look this up first. Seriously, these women, just as your own links say, later helped the Romans defend their cities - against their own tribe. But I assume we won't reach consensus on this. Cheers. Cyberevil 04:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, can we agree on leaving that out of the article on "Rape" as it might be unclear? By the way, seeing that you are from Romania, I have a friend from there and thanks to her I had to listen to "Dragostea Din Tei" for most of last summer. That was not quite my style of music, but it struck me that Romanian possibly is the closest still spoken language to Latin. This being off topic, but debating with a Romanian about Roman mythology reminded me of it. Cheers again. Cyberevil 04:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

De ce m-ai intrebat? Bonaparte talk 09:59, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Mehmed II. Great

Hello, you wrote:

Your bot removed an image of Mehmed II. Great! Now what? Where do we find another image of Mehmed? Sure, there was no info on its copyright status, but big deal! --Anittas 23:58, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I tried to find what you were referring to (it would be nice to provide a difflink next time), but I only found this edit resembling your question, but it did not change any image (fortunately, since the bot is not supposed to touch it). Please try to clarify your request and I will look into it, but I believe you have mixed up something. :-) Thanks! --grin ✎ 10:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Only problem is that I do not know why did you tell me this problem since it was not done by GrinBot ;-) I cannot help you with other bots than mine. --grin ✎ 13:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Anti-gay statements relating to Node

File:Bond Girl.jpg

Node, where are you?

Hi Anittas. I'd just like to say that it would be good if you could stop making anti-gay statements relating to Node. You have alluded, in a quite sarcastic and insulting tone, many times to the fact that he is gay, and I for one thing that's quite unacceptable (it amounts to discrimination based on sexual orientation). I haven't said anything until now, but looking back, I think you have said some quite hurtful things. I really don't see the reason behind it. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 10:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you do see the reason behind it. --Anittas 14:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Ronline, I really don't think it is, or has been his intention to insult Node with such remarks, it's more like some sort of playful teasing of a user he often clashes with. I know Anittas pretty well from the Romania forum http://pub18.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10 , and he has been quite consistent in his stand against homophobia there. So, to get to the point, I find it unlikely that his wish is to discriminate or genuinly offend Node based on his sexual orientation. Also, my impression after having read some of the two users's (often amusing) exchanges, Node appears to be playing along, rather than being offended. Anclation 12:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Anclation, how nice to see you posting here! :D --Anittas 14:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

To Node should be also a notice on his page added since he changes his behaviour when speaking and adressing to girls. Bonaparte talk 11:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, OK then. I'm not against jokes and even personal discussions on Wikipedia, but I just think that the anti-gay "teasing", which I agree is not particularly grave, is still not appropriate. If his wish isn't to genuinely offend Node, and Node doesn't get offended, then I suppose it's OK. However, other than for "fun", I still don't see the reason behind it - if you have something against Node, then argue with him on that certain point. Ad hominem statements don't really go that far. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 08:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't lecture me on my talkpage or anywhere. I'm glad you're admin and all that, and I understand you need to show a balanced judgement after you blocked Mikka, but please leave me be me. --Anittas 10:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Statement

Hi Anittas, I take offense from your statement here, and I would appreciate it if you would withdraw your remarks and apologise to me. --Node 08:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

As a supplement, I also take offence to your repeated homophobic attacks, whether covert or overt. Please, stop harassing me with such behaviour. Also, I would appreciate your apology for such actions. --Node 08:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

You know that photo of yours? I think it's time for that? ;) --Anittas 10:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Anittas, seriously - I think it's time to stop. Anti-gay statements are not tolerated anywhere, and that includes Wikipedia. Be they jokes or be they serious, they're still anti-gay statements, and they qualify as a violation of the no personal attacks policy. This is not about who's involved anymore, it's not about political stances or strategic stances or revenge on other users, it's about discrimination and insult, which is never positive. Ronline ✉ 06:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not discriminating him. I don't tell him to stop being gay or that he should have less rights than others. I'm just laughing at him, that's all. Is there an anti-laugh policy on Wiki? --Anittas 06:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there is. Because laughing at anyone because they're LGBT - or because they're of a different race, gender, appearance, etc - is discrimination under the vast majority of definitions. This makes you appear as homophobic. The point here, however, isn't discrimination per se. Rather, it's about insult and personal attacks, and you comments are considered that - see WP:NPA - where it says: Racial, sexual, homophobic, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. Religious epithets are not allowed even if the contributor is a member of a purported cult. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 06:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Seriously Anita, I am offended. You may be laughing, but I'm not. And when that happens, you should stop laughing and tell me you're sorry. --Node 14:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

You just want material for your RfC against me, but you should think twice before you act. If they ban me, what would you then do without me? Close your eyes for a moment and imagine a Wiki life without Anittas. --Anittas 15:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Anittas, I don't think it's good if you're banned because you've made some good contributions to WP. I think it's better if you stop making personal attacks and apologise for offending people. --Node 19:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks against Node ue

Anittas, your behavior is inapppriate. There is no excuse for you persistently offending Node ue. This is against policy, please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks.

Please understand, if you have the least bit of concept of fairness, that

what you do is wrong.

Do not do that, please. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 05:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you want an excuse for another RfC and I see you're still a Russian. Return to your roots, first, and then we talk. Okay? ;) --Anittas 05:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Anittas, please don't think that I'm just trying to find reasons to tell you these things, but seriously - as long as you continue to violate policy, I have to tell you. I'm a liberal, and I really don't mind what you do as long as it doesn't infringe on other people's rights. I can't let you be you as long as others are disadvantaged by that. Making anti-gay statements to Node and anti-Russian statements to Oleg is really not acceptable. And, as I said before, I just don't see the point... Ronline ✉ 05:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Golden spiral

I'm clueless about math, but if the golden spiral is not the same as the golden ratio, then it should not redirect to golden ratio. --Anittas 00:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. If there's an account of the golden spiral in the article on the golden ratio and there's no article on the golden spiral, then the redirect is appropriate. That is really quite commonplace. Michael Hardy 02:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Formal warning

Anittas, comments such as [1] cannot stand without an apology. Consider this formal warning a part of WP:DR. If after this post you continue editing without an apology to WP community, further action will be taken against you. Please get familiar with WP:CIV and WP:NPA. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 05:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Apologize for what? That he is not Moldovan? What I said is not false. It would be illogical to apologize for something that is true. It would be a crime. Node is not Moldovan; period. --Anittas 05:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe you are that naive but I'll try to assume good faith and explain. The way you used the word "Jew" is offensive: it is not a slur. Also, apparently you offended the LGBT community. You have to apologize on the pages where you offended those groups. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 06:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

In what way can I use the word "Jew" and not make it offensive? I don't know what the LGBT community is. --Anittas 06:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Without using it as a pejorative. Please also review WP:Civility--Tznkai 06:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you think it is a joke? Perhaps reading the corresponding articles would help, but at this point I do not believe you are that clueless. This is my last post here. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 06:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Anittas ←Humus sapiens←ну? 07:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

The LGBT community refers to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. As to your comment on Alex's RfA, that was quite insulting to Jews. There is nothing wrong in saying "Node is not an (ethnic) Moldovan, he is a Jew". The problem, however, is the way you capitalised Jew and then said "You do not speak Moldovan, JEW!". This indicates an offensive tone. Also, just because someone is Jewish does not mean they can't have another nationality. Node can be a Moldovan Jew, just like there are Buddhist Moldovans and Christian Moldovans. I also agree that an apology should take place here. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 08:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Unless it's against Wiki policy to use capital letters, I don't see where I have done wrong. There will be no apology and I kindly ask you all to fuck off from my talk page. Thank you. --Anittas 17:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Another edit like the one just did and you'll find yourself blocked. Please remember WP:CIV and WP:NPA. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 20:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean another identical edit like the one I just did, or another edit that also violates some corny Wiki policy? And for how long would I be blocked? --Anittas 21:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I am really not interested on you playing dumb. I think you're smart. Another one of those, that what I meant. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 00:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll add to the other comments above. If I come across another such slur from you, I will block you myself. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It feels good to see admins competing on who is going to have me blocked first, but my questions still stand. --Anittas 21:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Stop feigning ignorance, Anittas, you knew exactly what you were doing. --malber 22:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

RfC

Hi. I've started an RfC for your case at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Anittas 2. I really hope that the issues discussed here can be clarified there. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 22:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Node

Thank you, Anittas. But I've seen Node recently quite well understanding a conversation in Serbian at the Serbian Wikipedia Village pump. He seemed to understand Serbian very good, almost like he was a native speaker. However, you may be right, that actually was a sort of a simple conversation... I must say I'm quite confused now. And yes, I know that Node was supporting Moldavian Wikipedia. I liked that wiki because it was Cyrillic, and I like Cyrillic script very much. :) But, of course, there is no such thing as Moldavian, Montenegrin or Bosnian language... ;) --Djordje D. Bozovic 18:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Block

I blocked you for 1 hour for your personal attack against me on your RFC. You can petition other admins or to remove this block. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 18:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Whatever you say, person, but I'm not sure whether admins are allowed to take action on a dispute where they themselves are involved in - especially when they are the one's to provoke the reaction. --Anittas 18:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't involved in a dispute, I commented in an RfC. I made no attacks against you. Obviously, another admin with a different view can unblock you if they see fit.

I will also refrain on editing your RfC for an hour too, so you can't say that I edited and you couldn't reply. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 18:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

User Page

I like your new User Page. Keep the pic :) . Alexander 007 19:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks ;) --Anittas 19:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Planning to start RfArbCom

Hi Anittas. I've noticed that you've made a number of serious personal attacks recently - at Wikipedia:Romanian Wikipedians' notice board (against me and Orioane) and attack against Orioane. Please refrain from doing so. This is a formal warning. You've just had your second RfC and it seems that you haven't addressed any of the concerns there. The next step is a request for arbitration. The other thing that I request you do is remove the picture of Node ue from your user page and the statement "I like women, but Node doesn't." Thanks, Ronline ✉ 04:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I took my sword and attacked you by trying to chop off your head, but that didn't help because of the hydra that you are. One head off, two new appear. One step forward, two steps behind. Thanks for your message. --Anittas 05:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Right. Again, please remove the picture of Node ue from your user page and the statement "I like women, but Node doesn't". And an apology to User:Orioane for calling him a n00b and a traitor would be suitable. Ronline ✉ 05:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The only thing that I'm apologetic for is for not seeing how superficial you can be when playing your roles. You know that people are monitoring your edits and hope that someone will be impressed with your superficial patience and good-matters, but most are not that dumb. We were, but only to a limit. Good luck with your Arb. I'm sure you will succeed in having me banned. --Anittas 05:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Again, believe what you want. But what you're doing is a persistent and significant breach of policy, and that's unacceptable. Ronline ✉ 05:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You now have proof that you tried to solve the dispute without being successful. Go now and cry to Arb. --Anittas 05:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Your user page

Please don't write attacks against other users on your userpage. You've made good contributions to Wikipedia. Why not carry on doing that and forget the personal stuff? James James 05:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

How can a fact be a personal attack? If you tell me that you don't like apples and I write on my userpage that you don't like apples, is that an attack? Besides, I'm already banned. It's just a matter of time. --Anittas 05:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to try to explain it all to you in good faith again. But what you wrote about Node is not necessarily a fact, in the first place. Secondly, context matters very much. So - Node never said that "he doesn't like girls". Additionally, the context in which you said it is discriminatory and insulting. It would be just like me saying "Hi. I'm Ronline. I'm white but User:XYZ is black" or "Hi. I'm Ronline. I'm atheist but User:XYZ is Muslim". Do you see why that's discriminatory? It's picking out a user in particular for a certain trait such as race or sexual orientation, and that's discrimination. And I hope you understand why the picture of Node on your talk page is totally inappropriate. Ronline ✉ 05:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that argument is somehow reasonble, so I will change the remark. --Anittas 06:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

But the discriminatory part is still there. As long as Node is mentioned, it remains discriminatory. As I said above, if I said "I'm white. XYZ is black", that's discriminatory, because it's singling XYZ out in an arbitrary way for no reason other than to insult him/her, or show that he is different. You're doing the exact same thing to Node. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say better now. Ronline ✉ 06:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I've changed it again. --Anittas 06:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's a lot better. It still is, in my opinion, a statement that shouldn't be there, but it no longer qualifies as a personal attack. So, it's all good. The picture issue still remains, however, as well as the personal attacks against Orioane and I (the "traitors" stuff). Ronline ✉ 06:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Image

Hello, Annitas. I just wanted to let you know that I removed the image of User:Node ue from your user page—it's probably not a great idea to have it there. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Am I allowed to have the image or not? If I'm not allowed, I want an official statement of this. If I don't get an official statement and not someone's interpretation of the policy, then I will take it as it is allowed for me to have the photo. The photo was released on Wiki and it is in public domain. Am I wrong? --Anittas 06:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Node ue apparently uploaded the image into Wiki; if he found it offensive, it would have been speedily deleted; rather, he released it under GNU. Therefore, who can prevent Anittas from posting it on his User Page? Alexander 007 06:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to remove anything from Anittas' page, however, I think that the photo should not belong there because it's being used for insulting purposes and serves no other function on that page. I don't know precisely how this relates to images policy and GFDL, but it can be counted as an insult. Ronline ✉ 06:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Anittas, you are allowed to; I'm sorry if my comment somehow implied that it was against the rules. The photograph is not in the public domain, but it has been released under the GDFL. That being said, I feel that it is in poor taste. I will not revert, though. I may ask some colleagues what they feel about this sort of thing. Please consider removing it. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it is poor taste, but that's not me in the photo. I have a question: when they ban me and all that, do they have the right to change my userpage? --Anittas 06:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think they do. However, you userpage may be deleted and a message on it placed which says that you are banned. That's what usually happens. I don't know why, however, you're taking this ban as something for granted. Do you really not want to solve this conflict at all? Ronline ✉ 06:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

He released it on public domain. I can print out posters and sell them on ebay if I want to, and there's nothing you can do about it. --Anittas 06:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

No, the picture is not public domain, but GNU Free Documentation License. So, you can't print out posters unless you license them under GFDL and give them out with a copy of the license. But, anyway, the photo remains insulting and continues to be discriminatory in the sense that you're picking out Node in particular. If I put a photo on my talk page of another user, how would that feel for the other user? You know that it serves no function other than to make fun of Node, and is hence an insult. Ronline ✉ 06:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You don't decide what is discriminatory and what is not. You are not god. You can't dictate to others right from wrong. --Anittas 06:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't believe in god, so I don't think god can decide that either ;) All I'm saying a personal opinion, backed up logic and fact, and I'm trying to discuss with you, in good faith, why the addition of the picture is insulting. So far you haven't brought to me on substative argument as to why Node's picture should be placed on your talk page, or explained to me why it's not insulting. Ronline ✉ 06:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

That's because I don't think I need to justify it to you. The question is whether it is allowed. That's all I want to know. --Anittas 06:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

No. Personal attacks are not allowed. James James 06:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that editors have to ask themselves whether the image serves in any way to help build an encyclopaedia or whether it is in any way damaging. I think it's the latter and I'm going to edit your userpage in accordance with that view. I urge other editors to do the same. We should not defend attacks on other editors, whether they're made with words, pictures or whatever form. James James 06:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Since I'm an inclusionst, my argument is not whether the image helps to build an encyclopedia - it's on a user page, after all - but whether it insults other users. That image does insult others (in this case, Node ue) and for that reason it should be removed. This argument is not about the picture itself, but about the usage/context of the picture. Finally, and I've said this to you so many times, I don't understand what your reason for this is. By launching ad hominem attacks against Node, you're not helping anyone. If you have something against Node in terms of content disputes or differing points of view, raise this with him and use argument and fact, not personal attacks. If you feel he's behaved outside of policy, then go through the dispute resolution steps. Ronline ✉ 06:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

That argument doesn't hold. I can claim to be offended by a user who has a photo of a tree posted on his userpage, but that doesn't mean that he must remove it. When he released the photo, he agreed to have it released and being used by Wikipedia. When you release a photo, you agree that the photo might be used on Wikipedia - regardless of the location. If you then say that you feel insulted that the photo is used in a place where you don't want it to be...well, too bad. --Anittas 06:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I said nothing about the photo being a personal attack. That was Ron. Let him prove that it's a personal attack. --Anittas 06:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

It's a personal attack because through that photo you're picking on Node in particular to discriminate against him, and you seek to make fun of him and insult him. So far you haven't given any other reason for putting the picture there. Ronline ✉ 06:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

That's your personal interpretation, but that doesn't make it true. --Anittas 06:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Anittas, you said, "I agree that it is poor taste". Kindly stop doing it, then, please. It should be obvious a picture of a fellow Wikipedian is not at all like a picture of a tree. The issue is not the GFDL; the issue is one of maintaining a courteous working environment. Jonathunder 07:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about my action being of poor taste. --Anittas 07:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, it is in poor taste, and disruptive. I would encourage you to end this disruption. Jonathunder 07:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Warning

Displaying the photo of a fellow editor without their permission or against their wishes, particularly one you're involved in a dispute with, is by definition a form of harassment. Your refusal to remove it has become disruptive. If you continue to disrupt the project in this manner you can be blocked from editing. Please reconsider your actions, remove the image, and contribute to the project in positive, constructive manner. FeloniousMonk 07:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

There is no harassment involved. I do have the user's permission per se, from the time when the user uploaded the photo on Wiki and agreed to have it released. Kindly direct me to the policy where it says that one is not allowed to display photo's uploaded by other users without having their personal permission. Also, kindly direct me where this "form of harassment", as you call it, is mentioned in the Wiki policy. I would like to read on it. Thank you. --Anittas 07:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't play cute. Please remove the picture. Final warning. FeloniousMonk 07:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but if I'm wrong, I have the right to know that from official policy, not from the personal opinions of other admins. I have the right to request for the official information. That is the only thing that I trust. Show me the official policy and if it says that I'm not allowed, I will remove it. It's my right as a user. --Anittas 07:32, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

WP:POINT, WP:CIVIL. FeloniousMonk 07:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You've been blocked for 24 hrs for harassment and disruption. Please use the time to consider your behvior as it relates to WP:POINT and WP:CIVIL. FeloniousMonk 07:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe you abused your tools. I asked for the policy where it says that I'm not allowed to have the photo displayed. I didn't harass and I didn't disrupt anyone with the photo. --Anittas 07:42, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with FeloniousMonk. But you have the right to start an RfC and see what other people think... Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 16:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with FeloniousMonk as well, and the discussion at WP:AN/I indicates that he enjoys support from many others as well. — Knowledge Seeker দ 01:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

The many decide for the rest. Wiki is ruled by the mob, regardless of what's right and wrong. --Anittas 08:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Some advice

I really think you should adjust your attitude for the time being, as making harsh and insulting remarks about other users while your second RfC is still active can get you into more serious trouble than what you have experienced in the past. And getting kicked out will certainly not help your cause -- Anclation 13:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for asking Ron to give me a second chance, but I don't need his mercy. Ron, are you reading this? Please start with your *** Parade. Go to your Arb and make your case. --Anittas 13:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Anittas, this is not about mercy, it's not about conspiracy or anything like that. You make it seem as if this is some kind of war, and that you're fighting some sort of noble battle against "the enemies of the state" or the like. It's none of that. All I'm asking is that you stop making any sort of significant personal attacks that actually insult people and make them feel bad. That doesn't mean I'm trying to censor your speech. Everyone here has told you this very nicely and with a lot of understanding so far. However, your attitude has been to just dismiss them and say "I can do as I want. I don't care what you say. Go and complain about me. I don't care." I think that attitude will cause problems in the future, particulary when so many users have genuine, good faith concerns about your activity here. I'm not starting an RfArb for the moment, for two reasons:

• You were blocked for 24 hours, and hence "punished" for at least part of the personal attacks. Hence, you can't be punished twice for the same thing.
• You did try to understand what I was saying in terms of the "Node doesn't like girls" issue, and you did take steps to rectify that.

However, I really think it's important for you to just consider your actions and whether they've been good or civil. Remember, no-one here is against you and no-one here wants to find reasons to ban you. All we're looking for is for you to stop acting inappropriately and to work more collaboratively with other users. You've been given so many chances until now. I don't know why you like testing everyone's patience and good faith. It's not nice. Finally, as I have always said, I don't know why you're trying to play the bad guy here, why you're continuing to be stubborn and to talk to users in the way you do. It doesn't do anything good for your image, and by extension for the very values and ideals you say you're fighting for. Ronline ✉ 07:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)