User talk:Ed Cormany/Archive

Papotages

Hello Ed As a comment to answer what you said to Papotages, I would like to indicate you this link http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_ra%EBlien. Thank you. Ant

Ant, thank you for this link, although I am not sure what your exact purpose was. In this case it seems that Papotages made a disputably NPOV addition to the article, and then upon entering an edit war regarding that addition proceeded to make his characteristic cries of censorship in his edit summaries. Again, I think this NPOV dispute should have been handled in a better manner and the correct manner for a sysop to handle the problem was not to blank and then protect the page. In its earliest forms, this article had much factual information about an undoubtedly real, if controversial, group. I wish that I could express my sentiments on this article's talk page to both Papotages and the fr.wikipedia.org sysops that they are all acting inappropriately, but I unfortunately do not know any French. Nonetheless, I may even add an English comment. Ed Cormany 18:49, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hello Ed. I fear things are slightly more complicated than that. And I am in a rather difficult position regarding that case. Papotages is a difficult contributor. When I came back from holidays last august, I found the whole place in an uproar, I spent hours fixing the case, to restore peace over there. Then Papotages hardly edited. Just from time to time, but nearly all the time controversial stuff. I confirm we have 2 or 3 very strong censors; so that Papotages was indeed subject to difficulties with them; I tried to help as much as I could, but, alone, that is tough. Last week end, I was away, and during my being away, a big crisis erupted, with very strong comments on both parts, Papotages being very rude. He was then blocked, with rather little discussion (but granted, it was best); he then created several vandal accounts and behaved very bad. When I came back, things were totally messy. In the past few days, the peace was basically restored, I spent many hours on the article in question to help fixing the pov issue (as I had spent hours on the problematic article in august), I succeeded to motivate most people to regain quiet, and best of all, several people contributed, politely and quietly to the article. [1] are the last contributions of Papotages (not counting the contributions under 9 vandal names and many ips). I unblocked him yesterday (we did not have time yet to set a proper policy for blocking user names). He is busy "discussing" with his censors.

So, I feel wronged when you write all french sysops has been acting inapropriately :-) I think I did well, though I was late. But I am a bit tired of spending several days each time to fix issues, with certainty it will happen again. I know there will be another time. Likely, on catholicism and pedophilia, I already feel it. Also, Papotages has been blocked 3 or 4 days. We have been discussing the unblocking for that long. [2] The result is so clear cut, that I boldly decided to unblock him anyway. Bottom line, some people are practicing censorship (just like on en), but if it were that simple, that would be paradise :-)))) ant

I'm sorry if I categorically denounced the fr.wikipedia.org sysops too much...I understand you were dealing with a tough situation. At least on the English Wikipedia, it appears that the recent Papotages problem has died down. Best luck to you all in keeping censoring and conflict to a minimum. Share the Wikilove =) Ed Cormany 05:34, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)

thanks Ed. Unfortunately, I fear I have given up my hopes to succeed there. He completely blew it up. I just pray for minimal collateral damages and hope we will get out of the experience, stronger. I would have liked that we all agree on what to do as well, but it is like no one is going in the same direction :-). Sigh :-) Anthère

better to hunt for what is fun in that story :-) (banning is basically decided. I suspect next vote will be to call his FAI). Anthère