User:PageantUpdater/Evrik conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Time	Action	Link
22:40, 2007-02-06	PageantUpdater adds Pageant titleholder infobox and removes fair use pic (without detailing why)	[1]
23:23 2007-02-06	Evrik re-adds image and moves TAR infobox above Pageant infobox	[2]
23:30 2007-02-06	PageantUpdater removes image again citing fair use rules and re-orders infoboxes	[3]
23:33 2007-02-06	PageantUpdater tags Image:TAR10Kandice.jpg as replaceable fair use	[4]
23:34 2007-02-06	PageantUpdater leaves an rfu rationale on the image talk page	[5]
19:00 2007-02-07	Evrik reverts PageantUpdater's edit	[6]
20:17 2007-02-07	PageantUpdater re-orders the infoboxes and adds refu-c tag to image	[7]
15:43 2007-02-08	Evrik challenges rfu tag on image page	[8]
15:46 2007-02-08	Evrik removes refu-c tag	[9]
15:51 2007-02-08	Evrik leaves a message for PageantUpdater saying: "If you're going to tag Image:TAR10Kandice.jpg with {{rfu-c}}, then I suggest that you go and tag all the images in Category:The Amazing Race contestants. Otherwise your last edit may be seen as some sort of retribution for not getting your way and not promoting WP:civil"	[10]
15:54 2007-02-08	Evrik leaves an identical message on the image talk page and states that "This page was started because of her participation on the Amazing Race, not becvause she was in a pageant"	[11]
18:21 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater, assuming that Evrik is talking about the infobox issues, reminds Evrik that those happened before the issue arose, and says that she will look at the other images.	[12]
18:21 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater leaves messages on the image talk page saying: "Yes but the article does not include any information about the task she is competing in, and thus cannot be used under a fair use rationale. See Image talk:FarrellMTUSA03.jpg for more about this. And she is notable because she was a Miss New York and competed in the Miss America pageant and because she was on the Amazing Race, so it does not matter "why" the article was created." and "And just to clarify what I said: a free alternative could be found to depicted Pelletier. As the image is not used "for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents " per the fair use rationale (it is being used to depict Pelletier's participation on the show) it cannot be used under this particular fair use rationale"	[13][14]
18:46 2007-02-08	Evrik leaves a message for PageantUpdater, saying "Unless you actually go and tag all those other photos, it proves my point". PageantUpdater replies that she will do just that.	[15][16]
18:52 2007-02-08	Evrik leaves a message on the image talk page saying claiming that the image caption is enough to justify fair use, claims that I tagged the image for deletion because I was upset at the re-ordering of the infoboxes, and again states that "Unless you actually go and tag all those other photos, it proves my point"	[17]
18:53 2007-02-08	Evrik re-orders the infoboxes	[18]
18:56 2007-02-08	Evrik adds section headings and moves the image to outside the infobox	[19]
18:56 2007-02-08	Evrik reverts PageantUpdater's text edits from 6 Feb	[20]
19:27 2007-02-08	An anonymous editor re-adds the deleted refu-c tag with the edit summary "restoring improperly-removed tag, which is only to be removed by an admin"	[21]
20:13 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater refutes Evrik's claim that she tagged the image for deletion because she was upset at the re-ordering of the infoboxes. She accidently replies between two paragraphs written by Evrik	[22]
20:53 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater changes the tag on Image:AR9Hippies.jpg to generic fair use and includes its use on B. J. Averell and Tyler MacNiven	[23]
20:55 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater moves Image:AR9Hippies.jpg to a position in the Tyler MacNiven article where she thinks it qualifies under the fair use guidelines	[24]
20:56 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater moves Image:AR9Hippies.jpg to a position in the B.J. Averell article where she thinks it qualifies under the fair use guidelines	[25]
20:56 2007-02-08	PageantUpdater tags Image:Chip Arndt Access.jpg with {{db-noncom}}	[26]
21:18 2007-02-08	Rather than dealing directly with the fair use images, PageantUpdater nominates James Branaman, Tyler Denk, Kendra Bentley and Fred Holliday for deletion in a group nom	[27][28][29][30][31]
14:06 2007-02-09	Evrik reverts the anonymous editor's re-adding of the deleted refu-c tag with the edit summary "reverting anonymous edit - tag not applied everywhere that image in question used, only this one. See discussion"	[32]
17:34 2007-02-11	Evrik again claims that "The fact that you haven't tagged the other images is proof of your acting in a fashion that is not WP:civil." In relation to PageantUpdater accidently placing her reply in between his two paragraphs he adds "Also, mucking up my comments is not WP:AGF. "	[33]
18:11 2007-02-11	PageantUpdater again shows that she has in fact dealt with the other images, contrary to Evrik's claims.	[34]
18:11 2007-02-11	PageantUpdater asks Quadell to give an opinion on the status of the image and its use in the Pelletier article	[35]
18:39 2007-02-11	PageantUpdater attempts to be constructive, suggesting a possible solution for an image for the Kandice Pelletier article and sympathising with the frustrating fair use rules, she notes that she had invited an independent editor to comment	[36]
18:41 2007-02-11	Quadell states his opinion that the image could not be kept per the fair use rules, and adds "if you feel Pageant is being uncivil, then you could file an RFC, but this isn't the place to go on about it. (I doubt you'd get much support for the assertion, however; she seems to be acting well within the bounds of civility to me.) "	[37]
20:15 2007-02-11	Evrik states that the image should be kept as it is already used in the Amazing Race 10 article and adds "You mentioned that my comments about [[User:PageantUpdater\|PageantUpdater]'s] actions were not appropriate to the page - while that may or may not be civil to have tagged the image is some sort of retaliatory fashion - I am not going to escalate the disagreement by filing an RFC. However, I stand by the assertion that singling out the one image rather than the whole class of photos in Category:The Amazing Race contestants makes it hard to WP:Assume Good Faith and is is conflict with esperanza"	[38]
20:34 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater accepts she did not realise the image was also used in the Amazing Race 10 article and offers to sort things out by removing the rfu tag (but also removing the image from the bio article)	[39]
20:35 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater realises her mistake and removes the rfu tag from the image	[40]
20:35 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater removes the image from the Pelletier article citing the fair use rules	[41]
20:38 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater re-orders the infoboxes so the Pageant Titleholder Bio infobox is first, with the edit summary "reorder infoboxes so they are in a more logical sequence (related to the paragraphs)"	[42]
20:38 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater changes a section heading	[43]
20:41 2007-02-12	Evrik reverts the re-ordering of the infoboxes, moves the Amazing Race information to the beginning of the article, reverts the change of section heading and re-adds the image.	[44]
20:41 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater reverts back with the edit summary "revert back. The image simply CANNOT be used in the article. And the infoboxes should remain in the order they are, because she was notable through pageantry FIRST and the race LAST"	[45]
20:46 2007-02-12	Evrik asks on the image talk page if a GFDL image is available	[46]
20:46 2007-02-12	Evrik asks PageantUpdater if a GFDL image of Pelletier is available. PageantUpdater says no, and re-iterates the fact that she is looking at each image on a case-by-case basis.	[47][48]
20:48 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater reverts back to a version from the 7th with the edit summary "revert back to 7 Feb. Expand, add refs. Include current tv tag. Move TAR infobox to appropriate section of article (because it is more relevant there and contains less info than pageant infobox)" and adds references. This was PageantUpdater's third revert.	[49]
20:57 2007-02-12	Evrik leaves a message for PageantUpdater saying: "She [Pelletier] is more famous for being on AR 10, and it is a current event."	[50]
20:57 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater, loosing her cool, replies: "Why are you so pig-headed? And precedent proves you are wrong. Miss America state titleholders and national pageant contestants are notable in their own right, Amazing Race contestants are not. Hence, I am re-ordering the paragraphs so they are a) in chronological order and b) in order of notability."	[51]
20:57 2007-02-12	Evrik laughs at PageantUpdater who asks him to revel at her losing her temper.	[52][53]
21:57 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater asks Evrik to be constructive with his edits to the Pelletier article, rather than being disruptive	[54]
22:01 2007-02-12	Evrik issues PageantUpdater with a 3RR warning. PageantUpdater replies acknowledging the warning and repeating that the references found prove that Pelletier was more notable through pageantry than TAR	[55][56]
22:08 2007-02-12	Evrik tells PageantUpdater that "I stand by the assertion that singling out the one image rather than the whole class of photos in Category:The Amazing Race contestants makes it hard to WP:Assume Good Faith and is is conflict with esperanza"	[57]
22:25 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater's asks for Filll opinions on the debate on the Pelletier's article talk page	[58]
22:27 2007-02-12	Filll supports PageantUpdater's opinion that the pageant titleholder infobox should be placed first	[59]
22:45 2007-02-12	Evrik moves the references list below the external links	[60]
23:12 2007-02-12	Evrik creates redlinks for Charla & Mirna in the The Amazing Race 5 article	[61]
23:18 2007-02-12	Evrik creates redlinks for David and Mary Conley in the The Amazing Race 10 article	[62]
23:31 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater reverts the redlinks in Amazing Race 10 and notes in the edit summary "rv - no point linking to redlinks"	[63]
23:36 2007-02-12	Evrik creates redlinks for a number of contestants in the The Amazing Race 11 article	[64]
23:37 2007-02-12	Evrik creates redlinks for John Vito and Jill in the The Amazing Race 3 article	[65]
23:38 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater reverts the redlinks in Amazing Race 3 and notes in the edit summary "rv - no point linking to redlinks"	[66]
23:41 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater reverts the redlinks in Amazing Race 5 and notes in the edit summary "rv - no point linking to redlinks"	[67]
23:42 2007-02-12	PageantUpdater reverts the redlinks in Amazing Race 11 and notes in the edit summary "rv - no point linking to redlinks, can't imagine most of these people would be notable enough for an article"	[68]
23:46 2007-02-12	Evrik suggests he is being Wikistalked	[69]
23:49 2007-02-12	On both Pelletier's talk page and her user page, PageantUpdater suggests that Evrik is being ridiculous, as she would have done the same had any user created those pages	[70]
01:32 2007-02-13	Evrik creates David Conley, Jr.	[71]
01:41 2007-02-13	Evrik creates Mary Conley	[72]
01:45 2007-02-13	Evrik reverts back to the red-linked version of Amazing Race 10	[73]
01:54 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater adds afd tag to David Conley, Jr.	[74]
01:54 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater adds afd tag to Mary Conley	[75]
01:59 2007-02-13	Evrik removes afd template from Mary Conley with the edit summary "Reverting edit by wikistalker Pageant Updater"	[76]
01:59 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater starts combined afd nom for David Conley, Jr. and Mary Conley at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Conley, Jr.	[77]
02:01 2007-02-13	Evrik votes to keep the David Conley and Mary Conley and adds "this nomination is being made because PageantUpdater is wikistalking me"	[78]
02:03 2007-02-13	Pageant Updater reverts removal of afd tag on the Mary Conley article	[79]
02:04 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater asks Evrik to refrain from personal attacks and reiterates the reason for the nom	[80]
02:07 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater notes in the David Conley afd the previous afd nom for 4 TAR contestants	[81]
02:13 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater adds to the David Conley afd: "there is currently a conflict between myself and the article creater Evrik which has led to Evrik falsely accusing me of Wikistalking (I "stalk" my watchlist but nothing else). Please note that I made it fairly clear with this edit that if s/he was going to create those two articles they would be put up for deletion on the grounds of notability"	[82]
02:17 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater asks Evrik to start an RFC if he refuses to stop his harassment.	[83]
02:25 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater reminds Evrik that she has already dealt with images used on Amazing Race biographies. She then realises she missed images on Amber Mariano and Rob Mariano and removes those from the articles, citing the fair use rules\| [84][85]
02:26 2007-02-13	Daniel J. Leivick suggests merging David Conley & Mary Conley and adds "As for evrik I would be more careful throwing around accusations."	[86]
02:34 2007-02-13	Evrik leaves a message on the Admin's Noticeboard claiming (in summary) that: PageantUpdater singled out Image:TAR10Kandice.jpg in "retaliation" for the infoboxes being rearranged, and that her reversions to the four Amazing Race articles and nomination of David Conley, Jr. and Mary Conley were wikistalking	[87]
02:38 2007-02-13	Evrik alerts PageantUpdater to "incident report" on Admins Noticeboard	[88]
02:45 2007-02-13	Evrik votes to keep the four articles in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Branaman nom and suggests "this may be part of PageantUpdater WikiStalking campaign against me	[89]
02:52 2007-02-13	In response to the incident report on the Admin's noticeboard, Blnguyen suggests that Evrik has violated WP:POINT and reiterates that reality tv contestants aren't inherently notable	[90]
03:00 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater replies to the incident report with her side of the story	[91]
03:05 2007-02-13	Evrik queries Blnguyen's objectiveness (consider he had previously awarded PageantUpdater a barnstar)	[92]
03:09 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater adds the point that Evrik basically challenged her to deal with the images then reverted her actions when she did so	[93]
03:19 2007-02-13	Evrik stands by the assertion that "singling out the one image rather than the whole class of photos in Category:The Amazing Race contestants makes it hard to WP:Assume Good Faith "	[94]
03:38 2007-02-13	Evrik claims that when "PU doesn't get their way they start nominating things for deletion. It's happened repeatedly today and started with the image listed above. This is abusive."	[95]
03:44 2007-02-13	Evrik removes PageantUpdaters request for an end to harrassment claiming it was "abusive"	[96]
03:45 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater adds more to her side of the story and indicates that she is frustrated and sick and tired of the whole thing - as evidenced by the message left on Evrik's talk page asking him to stop harassment.	[97]
04:02 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater notes that "if I was truly wikistalking him, wouldn't I be messing with all his edits, rather than just those we share a common interest in?"	[98]
04:51 2007-02-13	Madchester notes "One of the basic tenets of Wikipedia is that anyone can make edits on an article. You shouldn't be taking it personally if someone changes or removes your edits. The fact is, most of those contestants are non-notable outside of the Amazing Race."	[99]
04:53 2007-02-13	Madchester reverts back to PageantUpdater's non-wikilinked version of Amazing Race 10	[100]
05:17 2007-02-13	Evrik reiterates that "PageantUpdater has a pattern of nominating articles and images for deletion to make a point, and it is this that is abusive"	[101]
13:45 2007-02-13	SouthPhilly responds on the messages on Evrik's talk page with the comment "What a mess".	[102]
14:57 2007-02-13	Evrik suggests merging David Conley and Mary Conley to Amazing Race 10 contestants and states "Alerting people to the fact that this article was nominated becauise of your haraasment is not a personal attack"	[103]
15:06 2007-02-13	Evrik brings the James Branaman afd from the AFD log for Feb 8 to Feb 13	[104]
15:09 2007-02-13	Evrik creates a separate afd page for Mary Conley	[105]
15:10 2007-02-13	Evrik turns the title of the David Conley afd to a subheading	[106]
15:10 2007-02-13	Evrik turns the title of the James Branaman afd to a subheading	[107]
15:11 2007-02-13	Evrik creates newsubheading on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 February 13 for "Amazing Race contestants", basically forcing all the other (unrelated) afd noms under this subheading when you clicked on it	[108][109][110]
16:59 2007-02-13	Otto4711 votes to merge and redirect and adds "I would also suggest that calling other editors "stalkers" is not civil"	[111]
20:29 2007-02-13	Madchester advises Evrik against creating grouped articles for Amazing Race contestants	[112]
20:33 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater admits that she missed the previous afd noms for Kendra Bently & other TAR contestants but states she wants the discussion to continue. She notes that Evrik was trying to revert the link to the afd in the mainspace articles to the previous noms.	[113]
20:48 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater clicks to what is going on and reverts the subheading at James Branaman, registering her anger	[114]
22:30 2007-02-13	Otto4711 suggests a speedy procedural close of the James Branaman afd, stating "the editing of this nomination by Evrik and PageantUpdater, resulting in the inappropriate removal of a great deal of the discussion, have in my view subverted this process past the point where this nomination should be allowed to continue. Shut this down and let PageantUpdater re-nominate the articles, preferably without the drama"	[115]
22:32 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater replies to Otto's comments "Hey it wasn't me who messed with the nom in the first place, it was Evrik. It was also Evrik who brought in the drama in the first place, forcing me to get defensive. Blame him but lets just get this over and done with once and for all."	[116]
22:55 2007-02-13	Honestly, I don't really care whose "fault" it was. His splitting up your nomination may not have been appropriate but your removing comments by a number of editors by reverting it definitely was. If you're so confident that this nomination will pass, then withdraw it and re-nominate to remove any question of impropriety on anyone's part in the nomination	[117]
22:13 2007-02-13	Evrik states: "They were all listed under the Branaman and Conley entries. I thought this was confusing or misleading - I also thought they had been listed incorrectly and was trying to add clarity. No ill intent or maliciousness was involved. If I violated policy - I am sorry. I never edited your comments. I was under the impression that each article nominated for deletion deserevd its own entry and not be grouped"	[118]
22:15 2007-02-13	PageantUpdater states: "hadn't noticed that anything had been removed. If that is indeed the case I would support removing these and starting again. I am not confident that the nom will pass... even I am only weakly supporting deletion"	[119]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/a/g/User%7EPageantUpdater_Evrik_conflict_4e01.html"

User:PageantUpdater/Evrik conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Views

Navigation

interaction

Search