User talk:JWSurf

You can also leave your comments at User talk:JWSchmidt, that is me also. But I will see comments left here, also. I recently made this account as a way to experiment with the single user login feature.

Welcome!

Hello, JWSurf, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!
Wikipedia:Editor's index to Wikipedia

Wikiversity

Sorry about the mislabeling, that is why I knew I didn't know enough about WIkiversity to guide him and to grab someone over there who knew more. Thank you for correcting me. MBisanz ^talk 16:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Caballegations

With regard to your statement at WP:AN#Requesting review of User:Moulton's block, I've commented referring you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Kelly, memes, and cabals. Labelling editors as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views is a personal attack, and you should take more care in future, not least because the Arbcom proposed decision you linked to includes the principle that Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. You may find it helpful or at least amusing to read WP:TIAC or WP:OWB (item 17). Hope we'll have more pleasant interactions in future, dave souza, talk 10:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hijacking the thread about Moulton

Surely you realize that by adding paragraph after paragraph of angry comments about the "ID Cabal" and myself, you are derailing any serious consideration of the actions taken against Moulton? This is unfair to him and inappropriate of you. If you have any consideration for Moulton, or concern about the way his situation was handled, you will not persist in attacking others in that thread. Stay on topic if you have such concerns; or do not post in that thread if you don't care. KillerChihuahua^?!? 19:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

"paragraph after paragraph of angry comments" <-- You seem to be attempting to assess my emotional state. Since you have expressed an interest, I will say that I am ashamed for Wikipedia by the fact that a good faith attempt to repair biased BLPs resulted in violations of Wikipedia policy and blocks of the person trying to improve Wikipedia. This is not the kind of thing I get angry about. I have past experience helping to clean up BLPs....this is just part of the routine process of cleaning up messes. "you are derailing any serious consideration of the actions taken against Moulton" <-- you are going to have to unpack this for me. How can discussion of the circumstances of Moulton's blocks derail serious consideration of Moulton's blocks? "attacking others in that thread" <-- I do not accept your assertion that discussion of the behavior of Wikipedians is "attacking others". "Stay on topic if you have such concerns" <-- I am on topic. "Raise issues you have about my actions elsewhere" <-- Can you provide a dif to the comment you left on Moulton's talk page when you blocked him? --JWSurf (talk) 20:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, I noticed just now that you mentioned my name and questioned a number of my actions. I'm happy to discuss any of the them with you, if you'd like. I don't have this page watchlisted, but feel free to leave a note on my talk page if there's anything you'd like to discuss with me. MastCell ^Talk 21:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: Actually, I notice now that you're just copying over comments from your "investigation" at Wikiversity. I'm curious about your method of "investigation", which seems to consist of asking leading, insinuative questions about my motivation without taking the first, basic step of any investigation: talking to me. I'm not hard to find. People are unlikely to take lessons on "ethics" from people whose behavior they find questionably ethical. MastCell ^Talk 21:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)