Wikipedia talk:Mirrors and forks/PQR

Personal vendetta

Is this the place for continuing what is apparently a personal vendetta? The user was repeatedly asked to identify breaches of copyright and refused to do so on RationalWiki (see contribs linked to above), it appears to be rather a grudge match caused by his membership of Conservapedia. I recommend that he be told to take his battles elsewhere. TheresaWilson (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

(BTW: if he denies his CP identity here's evidence) The "Lolcat" ref is untrue (WP referred to TWICE on the image page) and the stop hand image has now been linked. All you need do is tell us of specific instances and we'll correct them. TheresaWilson (talk) 01:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

If I may, I'd also like to point out that the "contact" is not the ISP providing web access to the server, it's Trent (user:tmtoulouse here and at RW), his email is ttoulouse@gmail.com, but really, if someone has a copyright complaint, they can just come to the wiki and tell us (specifically) what it is. Huw Powell (talk) 01:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I do not deny that I have a personal distaste for RW; it is a very childish slander site which serves no legitimate purpose in my opinion. It slanders more than just CP, and anyone not involved in the anti-Conservapedia cabal should be shocked at their "article" about Wikipedia. They list WP's homepage as http://www.nationalenquirer.com/! Granted it appears they're trying to make fun of CP's take on WP, but it's still disgraceful. Fact of the matter is, I was checking out what the site is all about, and when I found one copyvio, I looked for more. I refused to give examples because I feel as if the copyright holders should see it for themselves, and if I gave examples, they would delete the images (some of which other users had pointed out only to be ignored) before the CR owners ever saw it. When Wikipedia benefits from personal goals, is it so bad to persue those personal goals?

One last thing: I see some RationalWiki editors carry out their personal vendettas here as well, only Wikipedia does not benefit from their actions. Unlike some of the RW trolls I've seen editing the Conservapedia article, I do not, and would not, carry out "personal vendettas" here that I did not think Wikipedia would benefit from; I am not trying POV push or be disruptive, therefore, I don't see what the big deal is. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

"shocked at their "article" about Wikipedia" Hee! Hee! You are joking, I hope Mr Morris! Show please (with diffs) any edit made to the Conservapedia article that have been made by RW members that did not improve the article.

"if I gave examples, they would delete the images" Isn't that the right thing to do?

The only deal here is what you're making of it. TheresaWilson (talk) 02:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a whatever deal; the issue at hand has been solved (the Wikipedia images), so there's no reason to keep this thread going now is there? WP is not the place for arguements about CP/RW unless issues somehow concern WP. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)