User talk:Valjean/Draft

This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. For guidance on developing this draft, see Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs
This page was last edited by Valjean (talk | contribs) 3 months ago. (Update timer)

Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request an experienced editor review it for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Discussion

Pinging Soibangla, Andrevan, Muboshgu. Your input and revisions would be very welcome. This is not a theoretical problem for me. It's very real and distressing. Despite all the identifying content at the top of this page, it will likely be attacked with bad faith accusations. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's happening. This page is being ridiculed elsewhere. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 04:49, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good start

Seems like a good start. Maybe we should add some language contrasting with WP:NOTWEBHOST and a bit about WP:NOTPAPER and the intended use of WP:DRAFTs. Andre🚐 20:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I took a swag at another iteration. Please feel free to stet. Andre🚐 08:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! Andre, what do you mean by "generalization" here: "Some amount of generalization is respected..."? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:10, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That may not be the best term. It's similar to the message in the warning for {{uw-chat1}}. while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages are strictly for discussing improvements Andre🚐 21:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why the need for this addition to PAG

This was inspired by harassment and stalking that is uncivil and uncollegial. Yes, editors do not have totally "private" space at Wikipedia, but some respect should be shown for the personal processes used by editors. They should not be harassed, stalked, and ridiculed when they are not doing anything wrong. They should be allowed to work in peace.

With certain clear exceptions, editors have wide latitude in how they use their user pages. Their userspace is like their own desk, and the drawers contain various matters. Some drawers are closed, while some editors place some content on their desktop in the form of comments and essays. As long as it's of potential benefit to the project, editors are allowed to keep their research, collections of sources, and certain other content there, and, although it's possible to go through someone else's "desk" for no good reason, it's really disrespectful to do so and then criticize them for using their userspace for legitimate purposes. That's a really lowlife move. Editors who are acting in good faith should not be abused by stalkers.

Editors should be treated just like coworkers in a publishing house or newspaper office who have their own desks, perform their own research, and don't appreciate other editors who constantly look over their shoulder, rifle through their desk drawers, and make snide remarks about them behind their backs. Such behavior is uncivil and uncollegial. It poisons the atmosphere. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:28, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]