User talk:Saxifrage/Userwatch

Listed for deletion

I have listed page for deletion --Zeraeph 15:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noted the changes, thanks for having an open mind, I really hope you can find a way to convince me to withdraw your page from the MFD. I'm not too comfortable with trying to dictate what other people should do or what their opinions should be but all I really have a problem with now are the speculations on the bias and future intentions of other editors. --Zeraeph 22:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair concern. I do try to mitigate that by only noting the apparent biases that are clear from their edit history. Future aims tend to be clear from what their actions would achieve had they not been countered. — Saxifrage ✎ 22:45, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your points, (and, as I said, really did note the political neutrality) and I hate to seem to pick nits, but would it be possible to reword along the lines of "seems to have shown x bias" and "has previously done x [repeatedly]"? Just so that anything said is verifiable fact (ideally with relevant links to show that), not speculation? --Zeraeph 22:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sugaring my words beyond strict accuracy seems to get in the way of the list doing its job. Right now it's mostly a point-form list of "apparent bias: X, Y, Z" and "problems: X (diffs), Y (diffs), Z (diffs)". The exception is my commentary on the apparent goals of the Mattush puppetmaster, which is evident by looking at the network of socks and the collective impact of their edits.

I don't see a problem with documenting wrongdoing by other editors. I don't do it lightly, and I'm only noting things that are clearly wrongdoing. The Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam page, for instance, would grind to a halt if we couldn't write "negative commentary" on the people and edits we're tracking down. That page serves a very important purpose for building an encyclopedia, and I don't see how individual's user watch pages are different. (That said, I'm open to convincing. As it stands now, I would have to be convinced that this very useful tool is even more harmful to the project than it is useful.) — Saxifrage ✎ 16:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]