User talk:Kapowow

Welcome!

Hello, Kapowow, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Terraxos (talk) 05:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flags in Fitna[edit]

I think you are misinterpreting policy of WP:FLAG. Look at the summary there, and then look at the discussion page for that article. You are kinda new, and may not know this, but looking over the discussion page of a policy or guideline page can often tell you what sorts of discussions have come up before. Flag image usage has come up a few times, thought he last time predates your March 7th first edit. The usage of flag icons in the article fails a number of the criteria of WP:FLAG, as presented in the Summary at the top of that page (and explained in more detail below that).

I appreciate your use of policy to defend your edits - some new editors don't even bother with that, and usually get their butts handed to them by people not willing to try and help new folk. If you have questions, please feel free to ask. I'd be happy to help you understand things better. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies over the missed edit. I see you got it. Again, not my intention to bollix it up. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And you will find that my level of condescension for your edits is in direct proportion to you taking the low road in characterizing my edits negatively. Follow the Rule of Reciprocity; if you want nice, be nice. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing behavior[edit]

Please re-consider your behavior in talk pages: civility is not optional. Any further personal attacks on other editors will result in blocks. You may want to become familiar with What Wikipedia is not. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen the light, and shall not use abusive language against people as a reason for excising their comments. Kapowow (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My final follow up, because this is plainly a fruitless argument between the two of you which I stumbled into out of a misplaced desire to help you both get more out of your editing experience and I have better things to do with my time. You plainly care about the article which you have been editing, and have added much good material. You have just got hung up on a minor point of formatting which, through incivility on both sides (which I stated right at the outset) has developed into something, frankly, silly. It takes two to argue, and I have always maintained that Arcayne bears a fair proportion of the responsibility for letting this situation escalate, so I am most certainly not prejudiced in their favour. However, I have also criticised you, and this you seem to have taken exception to. Sorry, but I'm not about to retract that criticism; you could have behaved much better yourself. As far as your own aggression and lack of civility goes, in the initial discussion you posted a reasonable question. Arcayne then posted a fairly reasonable reply that included two, extremely minor, exasperated faux pas ("we call that prose..." and "kinda silly"). Both of these are exceptionally mild, and although patronising (which I also pointed out originally) are not derogatory. Unfortunately, you then accused them of launching an "accusatory diatribe", which was completely out of proportion to the assumed offense (and remember, don't assume offense was intended, assume good faith). There was no diatribe, and it certainly wasn't accusatory, which makes your comment stand out as pointedly aggressive. You then proceeded to be heavily sarcastic in your rebuttal (e.g. "duh", "...you mean like a ZX Spectrum?", "Wow you just...") and then cap it all by somewhat smugly reprimanding Arcayne regarding their own tone. This directly provoked Arcayne's "okey doke" passage, which again should never have been posted (again, as I said from the outset), but you didn't make matters any better by reading far more into it than actually was there. I cannot let your assertion that "the phrase "beat on each other" clearly means to masturbate one's penis on each other, and is highly offensive" stand without challenge, because that is simply wrong, and that error in your reading seems to have been the spark that set off this tinder box. "Beat on each other" is a common, extremely common, phrase in widespread usage that just means "fight". That's all. Try Googling it. You are wrong here and I did try to break it to you gently. 99% of editors enjoy Wikipedia and find it a stimulating, interesting place to be. There are always frustrations when your point of view isn't shared, or is actively criticised, but that's life. Roll with the punches, take the rough with the smooth, and many other corny cliches. As I learned a while back, the hard way, if you are having major problems with another editor then the only behaviour you can change is your own. If a big, nasty argument breaks out then you are at fault, no matter how righteous your indignation. Let them rant if they want to, but try (and everyone fails now and again) to retain a logical and calm attitude and don't get bogged down in petty bickering. You started well by backing up your point of view, but you never should have let it get personal. You don't have to respond to another editor's snide comments with rude comments of your own. That way lies the nuclear button. If you read something that irritates or angers you then get up, make yourself a cup of tea/coffee/hot chocolate/whatever, and spend a few minutes gazing out of the window. Leaping straight back in and responding with the first impulse is never the right course of action. I sincerely hope that you continue to add content to Wikipedia, you seem to have made a good start on that front. Ironically, sometimes if you really care about something, the best course of action is to walk away for a week or more. Then start a fresh discussion with a calm, rational, evidence-backed debate. Bye for now. Pyrop e 05:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your biased views have been noted Kapowow (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks - Final Warning[edit]

You have been warned repeatedly about your interactions with others. In fact, you posted as an addendum to the wikiquette alert that was dismissed your interest and commitment to working with people and being more civil, and then you post this. I consider it to be a personal attack, and if you doubt my interpretation (since it wouldn't be the first time), check out WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. You might be unaware that you can be blocked for comments like those you posted in the Fitna article. This is your last warning to be civil and polite, even to people you don't like. The next time you fail to be civil or make a personal attack to me or anyone else, I will file a complaint, and I am guessing that the god folk there will take a dim view on your continued antagonistic behavior. I want to make crystal clear to you what you are risking with your next uncivil or attack edit. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 06:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And on a side note, when you are on holiday, please do not alter your user identity by adding little bits. It tends to confuse matters for those who are all-too willing to see such behavior in the worst possible light. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 06:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No More Arcayne, Please - Final Request[edit]

Someone has a real bee in their bonnet Kapowow (talk) 02:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if you are asking me to stop posting here, or in general. If you do not want me to post here, I can easily honor that request. I would only contact you if I was required to do so after filing administrative action, like and AN/I for personal attacks or incivility, or 3RR, etc. Otherwise, so long as you remain polite, professional and civil, you get the assumption of good faith. Just be nice, and you will find myself and others taking a less dim view of your demeanor. Good luck with that - I mean it. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 01:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are an ass. Kapowow (talk) 02:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see the break did so much for your demeanor. I see a very short future for you here. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, the next time you make an uncivil comment, you will be reported. Please revise your demeanor. You have to work with everyone here, not just those that agree with you. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Preposterous. Be gone. Kapowow (talk) 18:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabel - International reaction to fitna[edit]

User:Prom3th3an/notice

Please go to this page and state your acceptance (if you accept) we will be dsicussing everything on that page Prom3th3an (talk) 03:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation - Notify[edit]

Reminder: Please check the mediation page RE International reaction to Fitna on a reguler basis Prom3th3an (talk) 03:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]