User talk:Aristeo/2007-07

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

Responses to Other Issues from the IRC Discussion[edit]

Thanks for pointing out that there are some additions that need to be made to the policy pages with regards to the use of temporary page protection to stop edit wars. These types of existing practices need to be included on the policy pages both so that the articles are accurate, but also so that the community has a clear opportunity to discuss the policy as a general principle, rather than arguing over individual cases. Despite your allegations to the contrary, protecting pages that are at the center of an edit war is a practice that has been used on occasion, i.e., when it seems clear that one of the participants in the edit war cannot otherwise be prevented from perpetuating the edit war. For example, Shivering:Gatekeeper was temporarily protected on June 29; Oblivion:Nocturnal was temporarily protected May 20-28; Oblivion:Baeralorn was temporarily protected on Oct. 20-21. And in the most comparable situation, you yourself blocked User talk:64.150.0.1 when it was in the middle of an edit war. Wrye's temporary protection seems fully consistent with past practices, given that an edit war had already started and that one of the editors has previously ignored requests to resolve issues through discussion before making any further edits to a contested page.

If you had concerns about this practice, you have had many opportunities to express your concerns. In addition to your direct involvement in one case, I know that you have been involved in discussions about several other cases. Therefore you were aware of these cases and could have easily brought up any concerns at the time. That would have helped to prevent the impression that the only reason you are concerned about UESPWiki rules is when the same rules are applied to you as to everyone else on the site.

Second, I think it is very inappropriate for you to try to sidetrack a discussion by making completely unfounded allegations, such as that "admins aren't bound by policy here." Again, if you had ever had concerns about admins breaking UESP policies you should have brought it up at the time, which would have allowed the problem to be resolved. And to be crystal clear, that would be cases where admins have broken the site's adopted policies, not the policies that you have at times tried to introduce without any support from the community. Currently, the only cases that have been brought to my attention of admins breaking UESP policy are actions taken by you when you were an admin.

Bringing up issues like these as barbs that derail discussions does not help to reach a productive solution for any of the issues. It is much easier to address individual, unrelated issues when they are discussed separately, and when each issue is discussed in its own appropriate forum. Existing, lengthy discussions, such as the one currently taking place on the Community Portal do not need to be made any longer or more complex than they already are. --NepheleTalk 16:04, 14 July 2007 (EDT)