Wikipedia talk:Article Rescue Squadron/BLP

personal attacks removed

This is a project page, I'd appreciate it is partisan and personalising comments about me are not made on it. Particularly when they are misrepresenting me, and selectively misquoting as has been Ikip's MO, and for which he has been warned by various admins and arbitrators.

I have NOT stated an intention to delete 60,000 article. This is an untruth.

Whether the deletions violated the "community's rules" is a matter of interpretation. You are entitled to yours, you are not entitled to have a project page state this as a fact.

If you want to comment on my action, please do so using your own signed posts or file an appropriate RFC.

--Scott Mac (Doc) 15:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is what Mr. MacDonald reverted:

In late January 2010, several administrators deleted over 400 unsourced biographies of living people ~~in violation of the community's rules.~~ They initially deleted over 400 articles~~, and stated an intent to delete 60,000 more.[1] (comments blanked)[2]~~

→

In late January 2010, several administrators deleted over 400 unsourced biographies of living people. They initially deleted over 400 articles.

RE: In late January 2010, several administrators deleted over 400 unsourced biographies of living people in violation of the community's rules.

Amnesty is defined as "a period during which offenders are exempt from punishment" you were an offender who the arbitration committee exempted from punishment. There would have been no need for exemption from punishment if there was no rule breaking in the first place.

RE: and stated an intent to delete 60,000 more.[3]

The full quote: "Notability is not my concern. Feel free to restore any you wish to source. I think I've got 60,000 to go.--Scott Mac (Doc) 01:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)"[4][reply]

RE: (comments blanked)[5]

The comments were blanked, replaced with a rationale for the behavior.

Okip 17:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted back to the simpler version that struck the middle ground. If this process page is focused on improving the listed BLPs, this is at best an unnecessary digression about the events related to the arbcom case. If you wish further dispute resolution, there are other venues available. –xeno^talk 18:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Okip 18:18, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]