VOTE YES ON DELETION- Early and Often, Don Murphy Article Deletion Options

[ColScott]

Hey boyo -

why does SPA RTFA get to vote and do whatever he wants but SPA TOOMANYTOOLS does not?

what are you hiding and why?

[SirFozzie]

I'll strike out his vote too. This is a discussion on the merits, not who can rally the most "soldiers" to his side.

Was that one of yours, btw? or just a soldier?

[ColScott]

I'll strike out his vote too. This is a discussion on the merits, not who can rally the most "soldiers" to his side.

Was that one of yours, btw? or just a soldier?

The Merits are simple

Outside of Hollywood ask 10,000 people who I am

NO ONE WILL KNOW.

He is determined to defame me- name ONE film producer on there (if you can) whose article has a "Professional Reputation" section. Go on.

Aww I should probably just wait till Wales calls back.

You didn't answer my question about what you have to hide so forgive me not answering yours.

Suffice to say the News will eat up the idea of prizes for editing my article.

I'll strike out his vote too. This is a discussion on the merits, not who can rally the most "soldiers" to his side.

Was that one of yours, btw? or just a soldier?

I see your strike out lasted all of 1 minutes

[Kato]

It took me a while to figure out what you were talking about...

But it's the deletion review of the Don Murphy article here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Del...view/Don_Murphy

Might have to change that thread title so it's clear for everyone else.

[SirFozzie]

I'll strike out his vote too. This is a discussion on the merits, not who can rally the most "soldiers" to his side.

Was that one of yours, btw? or just a soldier?

The Merits are simple

Outside of Hollywood ask 10,000 people who I am

NO ONE WILL KNOW.

He is determined to defame me- name ONE film producer on there (if you can) whose article has a "Professional Reputation" section. Go on.

Aww I should probably just wait till Wales calls back.

You didn't answer my question about what you have to hide so forgive me not answering yours.

Suffice to say the News will eat up the idea of prizes for editing my article.

I'll strike out his vote too. This is a discussion on the merits, not who can rally the most "soldiers" to his side.

Was that one of yours, btw? or just a soldier?

I see your strike out lasted all of 1 minutes

Ok, working on that. I'm not going to get caught in an editwar, but I can certainly see what I can do to fix that.

[Kato]

FT2, an arbitrator, writes about this mysterious RFTA character:

Clarification point: [[user:RTFA]] appears to be an alternate account used by a legitimate Wikipedian in apparent good standing,

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199013315

Really? How do we know that? How does FT2 know that? Maybe he's one of JoshuaZ's sockpuppets, maybe he's Jimbo Wales, maybe he's Rachel Marsden or Jossi Fresco or Gary Weiss? How do we know who this is?

If anyone mentions the F-ing "transparent ideals" of Wikipedia again, they deserve to be blackballed from any future discussion of any subject...

[SirFozzie]

Re-struck it out. As I said, not going to get in an edit-war over it (it'd be a fucking stupid reason to be blocked), but as I said there, the important part is the argument with regards to Notability, and I'm happy to let that stand.

[ColScott]

Re-struck it out. As I said, not going to get in an edit-war over it (it'd be a fucking stupid reason to be blocked), but as I said there, the important part is the argument with regards to Notability, and I'm happy to let that stand.

No you have not

[SirFozzie]

Oh for the love of Pete...

First: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199013305

Second: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199017002

As I said, I'm not getting into a war over it. I've disengaged from the discussion.

[ColScott]

Oh for the love of Pete...

First: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199013305

Second: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199017002

As I said, I'm not getting into a war over it. I've disengaged from the discussion.

War Snore
You said you would strike it out
Not because you like me
Because it was RIGHT
Now it is NOT struck out
Simple observation

[ColScott]

Oh for the love of Pete...

First: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199013305

Second: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=199017002

As I said, I'm not getting into a war over it. I've disengaged from the discussion.

War Snore
You said you would strike it out
Not because you like me
Because it was RIGHT
Now it is NOT struck out
Simple observation

Hmmm it's beginning to be clear who RTFA is- Joshua Z.

Since I cannot post, will you Fuppet please post to over there my following statement- or you Viridae?

"While it is charming to watch Joshua/RTFA try to make sure I stay in your clique, appearing in an article in the NY Times does not make you a public figure or notable for cult inclusion. If that were the case thousands of people each day from Firemen to school children would be added. Why are you being disingenuous to these people? The NY Times article is NOT about me it is about my site actually. It is NOT Biographical and I have never had a biographical article done. I wonder why Joshua you care so much?

I see that I am getting a lot of criticism for attacking Wikpedians. But as in any assault case, YOU started it and that matters. I didn't ask to be labeled a pedophile on your site. How dare you hate how I respond to your attacks. Next time you are mugged, god forbid, do you want to be told "well you didn't need to hit him with the pipe?" And yes it IS the same thing.

Even now this "editor" you are defending RTFA is dogmatic about including a huge "Professional Reputation" section. Have you made notice of how many film producers you have articles on? Precious few. And how many have a Reputation section? One that a fifteen year old can add to?

I was being mean to Viridae over at WR. I did not expect him to delete the article. But it is a bold and wonderful thing he did. It has been 17 months of constant stress and hell over this, which all started with a little boy from Toronto. Go ask 10000 people who I am. No one will know - or care.

Much is being said about the fact that I want no article. That is simple too- because no matter what you write in it, someone can come along tomorrow and start all over again.

Finally I point way up above to the comment by Benjboi who asks if deletion isn't very Big Brotherish. Well I studied 1984 by Orwell for a film project, and no sir, keeping files and reports on strangers and making them available to the public- that is what the Police State would do.

Please do the right thing. "

This post has been edited by ColScott: Tue 18th March 2008, 5:40am

[One]

Who the hell is ColScott?

[Amarkov]

Well, his passionate defense of Mr. Murphy should give you a hint.

[The Joy]

Who the hell is ColScott?

Don Murphy himself! I believe he's mentioned this before?

Given JoshuaZ's militant "Last Defender of the Wiki" mentality, I wouldn't put it past him to use socks to push his agenda. I think we speculated whether he was David Spart or DennyColt back in the day, but I don't think we came up with anything conclusive.

[One]

Ok, well whatever. This thread has almost no context (hence is not a legitimate thread for "general discussion"), and it appears to be a continuing argument between ColScott and SirFozzie. I think it should be thrown into the tarpit post haste.

EDIT: I don't know who he is because I try to avoid this crap.

And yes, JoshuaZ was desysopped for that, yes? Would explain how FT2 knew.

This post has been edited by One: Tue 18th March 2008, 5:46am

[ColScott]

Ok, well whatever. This thread has almost no context (hence is not a legitimate thread for "general discussion"), and it appears to be a continuing argument between ColScott and SirFozzie. I think it should be thrown into the tarpit post haste.

EDIT: I don't know who he is because I try to avoid this crap.

And yes, JoshuaZ was desysopped for that, yes? Would explain how FT2 knew.

Others are reading and following along just fine.

[One]

Others are reading and following along just fine.

Yeah, because they presumably followed it from another thread. To the uninitiated, this would be nigh meaningless:

Hey boyo -

why does SPA RTFA get to vote and do whatever he wants but SPA TOOMANYTOOLS does not?

what are you hiding and why?

[ColScott]

Ok, well whatever. This thread has almost no context (hence is not a legitimate thread for "general discussion"), and it appears to be a continuing argument between ColScott and SirFozzie. I think it should be thrown into the tarpit post haste.

EDIT: I don't know who he is because I try to avoid this crap.

And yes, JoshuaZ was desysopped for that, yes? Would explain how FT2 knew.

Others are reading and following along just fine.

Thank You Amarkov

[The Joy]

Mods will generally change thread titles if it becomes too confusing for readers. As a courtesy to the thread starter, would you like a different name for this thread, ColScott?

I see WP administrator John Reaves may soon be joining us here perhaps to explain his actions throughout this affair. Then again, maybe not, who knows?

[ColScott]

Mods will generally change thread titles if it becomes too confusing for readers. As a courtesy to the thread starter, would you like a different name for this thread, ColScott?

I see WP administrator John Reaves may soon be joining us here perhaps to explain his actions throughout this affair. Then again, maybe not, who knows?

New Title


VOTE YES ON DELETION- Early and Often