Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:NWA.Rep

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. Per WP:USER, established editors are allowed a certain amount of leeway in the design and content of their userpages. However, the clear consensus among the editors participating in this discussion is that the User:NWA.Rep userpage goes beyond the leeway normally extended to editors, and runs afoul of WP:FAKEARTICLE, WP:POLEMIC, WP:BLP, WP:SMI and a number of other policies and guidelines, and should therefore be deleted. 28bytes (talk) 17:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:NWA.Rep[edit]

User:NWA.Rep (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The userpage poses as a encyclopedia entry and contains unsouced contentious information on living persons in violation of the biography of a living person policy. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 02:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get why some individuals keep wasting your time on frivolous issue, userspace harassment, censorship, and sabotaging my ArbCom candidacy. instead of improving the content of this encylopedia. You are beating a dead horse here. The exact same thing was already been discussed before Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta and at the UI spoofing incident.--NWA.Rep (talk) 02:59, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, the userpage is written like an encyclopedia entry and presents unsourced controversial biographical information on multiple living people. The userpage violates both WP:FAKEARTICLE and WP:BLP. You are running for ArbCom, you are going to come under scrutiny from the community. My bringing up a policy violation is not harassment. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 03:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a policy violation and it has already been discussed Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta. Stop wasting the community's time.--NWA.Rep (talk) 08:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't think this is the way. Please hold the righteous indignation for a day or two; I was just planning to look after the userpage issue, and I know NWA.Rep listens to me. I'm just a slow worker, sorry about that. Bishonen | talk 03:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]
  • No problem with regards to WP:FAKEARTICLE and Wrong forum with regards to WP:BLP. Comments follow. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 03:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • NWA.Rep: I don't believe the BLP issue was brought up at the previous MfD, actually.
    • I don't think the WP:FAKEARTICLE claim has merit, since that refers to drafts of articles, not to pages which are clearly self-referential and autobiographical (and probably satirical).
    • I'm not sure about the BLP issue, though the BLP noticeboard would have been a better forum for that part of the discussion. We have a fairly serious problem if "Andre DeAngelo Wallace Jr." is a real person and if we haven't verified that he and NWA.Rep are the same person. In that case, WP:BLP would apply and negative unsourced information should be "removed immediately and without waiting for discussion," (emphasis in original). However, I don't see any problem if Wallace is merely a satirical construct, as seems likely from the userpage, or if we've verified that he is NWA.Rep. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 03:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update of my comment above: done, please take a look. I haven't touched the userboxes: some of them may not be strictly true, lol, but that happens. I do believe some of them are jokes. Anyway, they're up to the user. Philosopher, your point about "satirical construct" is well taken, but even so, it's better on a subpage, IMO. It does look like a BLP. Bishonen | talk 15:33, 30 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]
The current userpage no longer has any issues since you have edited it. Regarding User:NWA.Rep/Andre DeAngelo Wallace Jr, where the article was moved to. If it is kept as a satirical piece, it might be a good idea to add NOINDEX and Template:Humor to make it clear that the biographical information should not be taken seriously, and to make it clear that it is not an encyclopedia entry. Especially considering it contains contentious unsourced statements about living people who have Wikipedia entries. It would actually be best to remove those contentious statements altogether. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 16:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You really need to get a grip about that and start writing some articles.--NWA.Rep (talk) 19:06, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This coming from the alleged author of twenty theoretical FAs, and whose only article edits in 2011 were content removals rather than additions... →Στc. 01:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, those are good points, Alpha. I'd definitely do the noindex thing if I knew how; maybe somebody else? As for Template:Humor, no, I'm not one to add templates in the userspace, especially not that one. It's an aggressively humorless template, IMO, and it's always a bit of a miserable experience to have it added to one's pages (in my experience). Also, a subtler point: the template says the material "is kept because it is considered humorous", but I'm not sure it'll be kept, in the long run. Anyway, I hope NWA:Rep's space can be dealt with conservatively and circumspectly until after the election. As long as the subpage in question is noindexed, further issues can perhaps be revisited later. Bishonen | talk 19:28, 30 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]
The deletion template says "You are welcome to edit this page, but please do not ... move it, or remove this notice, while the discussion is in progress". Out of curiosity, does a cut-paste move of a portion of the content fall under moving, and since the content the nominator originally wanted deleted was moved to a different page, are we MfDing the userpage or the recently created subpage? →Στc. 01:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment See User:Ryeinn. Obviously a long running joke of some kind. I have noindexed - I assume whoever the picture is of doesn't object to the caption. Otherwise, just seems one of those things some people keep in their userspace. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Elen. Bishzilla has welcomed the little Ryeinn. Bishonen | talk 22:52, 30 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]
It is quite possible that Ryeinn who copied my userpage style is the same person who vandalized my userpage several years ago. On Ryienn's userpage, he accused me of being pompous and talking about myself in the third person, which was exactly an anonymous IP said when he vandalized my userpage. Please refer to this diff [[1]] [[2]] (note that he also put homosexual pornographic image on my page).--NWA.Rep (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SPI. This page is to discuss the possible deletion of a userpage, not to report possible suspected sockpuppets or sockpuppeteers. →Στc. 01:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well stop bringing that page up and pinning it on me. You are the one who is making unfounded accusation and censoring my userpage. I'm gonna talk to Bishy and most likely restoring my userpage in 24 hours whether you like it or not. This whole campaign to censor my page clearly stems from vendetta to sabotage my ArbCom candidacy and a campaign to agitate me enough to get me blocked so my message would be discredited. Obviously you people want to keep me retired so repeatedly bringing up a dead issue that I care deeply about is probably the easiest way to boot me off the project. I'm trying really hard to act civil, but quite frankly this whole thing seems like baiting to me.--NWA.Rep (talk) 05:49, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have restored the original content. The community will now decide your fate. →Στc. 03:03, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They already decided my fate years ago and the result was a speedy keep Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta. Σ's harassment campaign continues. I bet if this mfd ended with no consensus, you will keep bringing this dead frivolous issue up again and again and again and again.--NWA.Rep (talk) 08:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:CCC for the first part, and WP:AGF for the second part. Bringing up a three-year-old discussion means nothing, especially because of the differences between the nominators' concerns. →Στc. 08:32, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to break it to you, but everything you said so far is completely irrelevant and I quote means "nothing". This Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta discussed all the relevant non-issues and the guy who nominated it made a fool out of himself. But I guess the more things change, the more they stay the same. This is clearly a witch hunt and an attempt to sabotage my candidacy just like 3 years ago. And don't accuse me of not assuming good faith when my page was sitting there untouched for 3 years yet the harassment starts again when I unretire.--NWA.Rep (talk) 08:55, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again, please read WP:CCC for the second sentence. For the 4th sentence, I doubt your chances of being elected to ArbCom will increase if you have "China=shame" on your userpage.
As for the last part, you have nominated yourself to ArbCom. Did you really think that you would not undergo any scrutiny from the community? →Στc. 09:35, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't seem to stop User:Jiang from gaining adminship when he had Taiwan=shame on his userpage and still has an offensive image that curses Taiwan currently on his userpage, but then again Wikipedia is much more scared to piss off 1.3 billion Chinese than 23 million Taiwanese. So much for NPOV.--NWA.Rep (talk) 09:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Scrutinized, yes. Persecuted and harassed, no. I was very upfront about my record in my candidate statement because I have nothing to hide. Harassing me and wasting my time over a long-resolved frivolous dead issue is not scrutiny. It is harassment.--NWA.Rep (talk) 09:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to closing admin: Much of the content the MfD nominator was concerned about has been copied to User:NWA.Rep/Andre DeAngelo Wallace Jr. If the consensus is to delete the userpage, the aforementioned link must go too. →Στc. 03:03, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: User:Future Perfect at Sunrise has the exact same userbox on his userpage [3] and he had it there before I did, offending me because he seems to be making light of an event that was deemed controversial by arbitrator FT2. I actually asked him to remove it and he refused. I would gladly remove it if he does the same. Once again the double standard here is appalling. The only difference his is not considered a sarcastic personal attack against me while mine is is because he's an admin--NWA.Rep (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Reasoning below (other users' comments retrieved from their ArbCom 2011 voter guides).
  1. Sven Manguard said "The candidate's userpage takes the form of an autobiography filled with inappropriate comments, POV that dances ever-so-carefully on the line between barely acceptable and hate speech, a personal attack against another Wikipedian."
  2. HJ Mitchell said NWA.Rep has "[a] misleading userbox taking credit for 20 FAs; polemic userboxen; overly political userpage in general."
  3. Guerillero said:
     · [NWA.Rep's] user page is extreamly myspacey
     · It claims they are the author of 20 FAs. I have been searching their contributions and can't find one of the 20 articles. Their name does not appear at Wikipedia:WBFAN
     · The candidate seems to think that the removal of his fake new message bars, in line with what I perceive as a community standard, is "harassment."
  4. Ealdgyth said "Do NOT like the fake "you have new messages" banner on [NWA.Rep's] user page. At all. Just no."
  5. Heimstern commented, "How he continues to have the phrase "China=shame" on his userpage without the community making him remove it remains a mystery to me."
I had brought these up with NWA.Rep earlier, but my comments were dismissed as harrassment and removed, along with the MfD notice (which simultaneously readded the removed content), under the rationale that there was no consensus to remove the offensive content. Note that this occurred after I told him about the above comments about his userpage. By readding it, NWA.Rep is ignoring strong and recent consensus from established users that his userpage contains offensive material. As such, it must be deleted. →Στc. 03:17, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As much as I concur with the ArbCom voter guides' nutshell analyses, I have my own analysis about the userpage. From the top down:
  • I couldn't care less about the "You have new messages" banner, as it doesn't get in the way of anything.
  • China=shame is wholly inappropriate and immature. I find it a polemical statement completely unrelated to anything even tangentially relevant to the Wikimedia Foundation, and a disgusting violation of WP:NOTSOAPBOX. WP:UP#POLEMIC clearly states that "these are generally considered divisive and removed, and reintroducing them is often considered disruptive".
  • The caption in the infobox, hottest nigga alive... enough said.
  • User: Future Perfect at Sunrise takes the definition of admin abuse to a new level.[4] is a personal attack. WP:UP#POLEMIC says that "Users should generally not maintain in public view negative information related to others without very good reason". Is a userbox a good reason?
  • This user helped promote 20 featured articles on Wikipedia.[citation needed] People take that type of userbox very seriously. Lying with that userbox and being categorised under Category:Wikipedia featured article contributors is a horrible abuse of good faith.
  • The body of the userspace article is riddled with unsourced controversial biographical content, factual errors, and POV. WP:NOTFACEBOOK and WP:NOTSOAPBOX.
→Στc. 09:35, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep (really should be closed). I'm not even sure if I can take this seriously or if I should even dignifies this deliberate attempt to harass me a response. First of all, my userpage was already nominated for Mfd years earlier by someone who had a history with me and the result was a speedy keep Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta and Wikipedia_talk:User_pages/UI_spoofing. How much time do you want me to waste on this? I'm upset that I have to keep dealing with this when past precedents clearly show the community allows me to keep my userpage as its current state (including in the UI spoofing incident now chronicled in WP:LAME. It seems like they're gonna keep bringing it up until they can sneak the mfd through without most of the community participating in the actual discussion. This editor clearly does not know how Wikipedia works. If the best you could do is to cite a bunch of candidate guides from a bunch of "Wikipedia insiders" who have long hold a strong personal grudge against me and want nothing more than kicking me out of the encyclopedia after I un-retired. The part that pisses me off the most is because my page was nominated for mfd before (when I was known as Certified.Gangsta) and the result was a speedy keep. And of course we all removed the joke banner incident. I don't understand why these 2 users just came out of nowhere after reading some hostile arbcom candidate guides and decide to mess with my userpage and just randomly revive a dead frivolous issue. Even the people who wrote the arbcom candidate guides didn't bother to confront me over this. How many times do I have to go through this? Why are they bringing up issues that are dead long ago? It's especially disappointing since I have been trying really hard to be productive since coming back, but it seems like they just wanna drive me away or agitate me enough to get me blocked. Stop wasting the community's time over something that has been resolved numerous times years ago.--NWA.Rep (talk) 08:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Drive you away"? You've made roughly a dozen productive edits in each of your last three years on the project. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you read my full candidate statement on my subpage, you will see that a. I was retired for almost 3 years. b. I have to refrain from editing the mainspace during the ArbCom election because one of the candidates guides writers was wiki-stalking my contribution after I pointed out a failure to assume good faith and a false allegation in his guide. I don't want to give the rogues an excuse to block me during the election like my run 3 years ago.--NWA.Rep (talk) 16:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. My analysis of this page's contents:
  1. You have new messages (last change). This is clearly disruptive as per WP:SMI — the look of the link/banner is too similar to the real new messages/last changes banner. In addition, it's a violation of WP:NOTMYSPACE.
  2. China=Shame This is one of the most disruptive parts of the userpage, and is a violation of WP:UP#POLEMIC and WP:NOTSOAPBOX.
  3. The big green box is also a violation of WP:NOTSOAPBOX.
  4. hottest nigga alive Just no.
  5. The "Future Perfect at Sunrise" userbox is wholly inappropriate. A violation of WP:NPA + WP:UP#POLEMIC + WP:NOTSOAPBOX.
  6. Userpage's BLP-like content contains more violations than I can count of WP:UP#NOT.
  7. "This user helped promote 20 featured articles on Wikipedia." Not true. NWA.Rep has never significantly contributed to a single FA on Wikipedia. This userbox is extremely misleading.
  8. Pretty much all the content after that/BLP-ish content is false or soapboxing.

HurricaneFan25 19:03, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply I'm gonna address each malicious accusation one by one.
  1. You have new messages (last change). Joke banner is allowed and I will never remove it Wikipedia talk:User pages/UI spoofing
  2. China=Shame admin User:Jiang still had an image of Taiwan=shame on his userpage and I complained to multiple people about it and no one cared. I guess wikipedia is more concerned about 1.3 billion Chinese than 23 million Taiwanese. So much for NPOV. He still has a very offensive image on his current userpage than curses President Chen, accuses Dalai Lama of owning slaves, and celebrating Taiwanese people dying in the 9-21 earthquake.
  3. The big green box: Political statements are allowed. Racial contents are not. That's what I was told. I was appalled at Jiang's userpage.
  4. hottest nigga alive I can easily remove this if Bishonen asks me to.
  5. The "Future Perfect at Sunrise" userbox: Admin User:Future Perfect at Sunrise has the exact same userbox on his userpage linking to the same AN/I thread and he had it first. Making light of an event that prompted my exit from Wikipedia 3 years ago is deeply insulting and offensive to me. Why the double standard? Is it because he's an admin? I will gladly remove it if he removes his.
  6. "This user helped promote 20 featured articles on Wikipedia." There's a difference between promoting and writing. Go verify every single person with this userbox. Why am I getting singled out?

My advice, go write some articles, go improve the content. If you hate my userpage, don't keep staring at it. Go look at User:Inferno, Lord of Penguins userpage and tell me how that is any better. This is a dead frivolous issue that has been discussed again and again and again. Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta Wikipedia talk:User pages/UI spoofing among other discussions. It is emotionally draining and time consuming to keep defending my userpage. I lost a whole night of sleep on the UI Spoofing incident. Even if I get to keep it this time, you people will no doubt keep nominating it for deletion until you get what you want and try to sneak a Mfd through with almost no community participation (unlike the joke banner incident when thousands of Wikipedians participated and the other Mfd was a speedy keep with only the nominator voted delete). This injustice would never happened to any other user. This is a crucification. This is a witch hunt. This is a persecution. You can wikilawyer all you want but the fact of the matter is the community had already spoken. Just because you recruit a bunch of people who hold personal vendetta against me and my stance on the ArbCom election through IRC does not adequately represent the community. Nothing that was speedy keep would ever keep getting nominated for deletion over and over and over again. There was no such precedents especially on someone's personal userpage.

I came back after 3 years and run for arbCom in good faith. Why am I being persecuted again just like my run 3 years ago? I even pledge to stop editing mainspace articles during the election just to not give anyone a reason to humiliate me by blocking me during the election. Sven Manguard, one of the writers of the candidates guides, already wiki-stalked my contributions after I told him his baseless bad-faith accusation of me having a sockpuppet was untrue on his guide. How long will this harassment last? When will Wikipedia give me a chance?--NWA.Rep (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re China=Shame — don't compare to others, compare to yourself. The fact that Jiang had one doesn't mean you can have a similar one now; the Future Perfect at Sunrise "attack" userbox, although it may be used on their userpage, is used in a much lighter way, as the subject, than you use it. HurricaneFan25 21:44, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re. The reason why I was even considered a problem user to begin with 5 years ago was because of the Jiang userpage. I went around telling everyone to get it removed and got repeatedly blocked. Get him to remove his and stop targeting me. I hate the double standard here. I would gladly remove all the controversial stuff if they remove his. Same with Future Perfect. I was running for arbcom 3 years ago and went on AN/I to question his conduct on unilaterally a ban-evading sockpuppet. He proceeded to wiki-stalk my contributions and coordinated with another arbcom candidate to block me before the election. For him to make light of a situation when even arbitrator FT2 said was an unwarranted block is a slap in the face. Why does he get to insult/make fun of my legit concern about him on his userpage?--NWA.Rep (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta already been discussed. Obviously you people will just keep bringing it up until you can sneak a mfd through. Why don't you just put a bullet in my head? Wouldn't that be faster?--NWA.Rep (talk) 21:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FAKEARTICLE, WP:POLEMIC and various other violations of WP:USER, spelled out in more detail above. Robofish (talk) 01:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per HurricaneFan25, Robofish etc. Multiple reasons for deletion. Not a marginal case. --Kleinzach 00:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, and smack certain people with a sense of humor, even if they don't know what hit them. If there are BLP issues, then just blank that part of the page and give the user a warning, don't delete a userpage. Or else taking to the BLP noticeboard. What's wrong with political statements on userpages? China=shame, USA=Shame, whatever, is there a policy against that? Simulation of the interface is strongly discouraged, but the joke seems to be benign. IDONTLIKEIT is not enough here. Nor is the BLP issue, that should be handled another way. Personally, I find any identification with gangsters to highly offensive, but is that a reason to delete a userpage? We are a society of tolerance. I could see it if he had said "fuck China, the one-child policy wasn't drastic enough." But a statement of personal politics like what's there is not a big deal. Be——Critical 21:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Before this MfD began, I removed the offensive content, which was restored shortly after. It happened again shortly after. The relevant notes on the talk page were met with accusations of harrassment, and then completely removed. What I'm trying to say is that an alternative to deletion was already tried, and the tone of the response gives me doubt that the BLPN would help the situation at all. →Στc. 00:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If there are confirmed BLP concerns which the user keeps re-inserting, that's reason for blocking. The "offensive" content would have to have been BLP concerns, otherwise it's just a political statement. You removed much more than whatever material which is truly inappropriate on Wikipedia, such as

"Wikipedia needs a shakeup, a revolution. We are sick of getting run over by rogue admins. We are tired of being told what to do by factory-made zombies and robots who are only interested in the politics rather than the content of the encyclopedia. We must prove that the average content writers who have a life and only edit Wikipedia as a hobby have a voice too."

And I'm sure that not all the biographical material was offensive. So, although there may be concerns here, it's obvious to me that at the very least you were heavy handed, and I don't blame him for thinking it was harassment. So, note to the closing admin: please consider removing any confirmed BLP violations and warning the user not to restore them under pain of block. Be——Critical 01:19, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW this is what the page looked like when I edited it.
I believe that the two edits restoring the disputed content show that NWA cannot be trusted to leave the userpage alone if an admin decides to remove the content without deleting the userpage. →Στc. 02:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well then that's when he gets blocked. But you want the legitimate content which just happens to offend you deleted along with the unspecified BLP violations. It is perfectly understandable that your edits were reverted seeing as you made no distinction between allowable and forbidden material. Be——Critical 02:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per HurricaneFan, JamesBWatson et al. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 12:02pm • 02:02, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This revision, containing the text Wallace is a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Hip hop, Wikipedia:WikiProject Podcasting, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Taiwan. So far, he has significantly contributed to over 20 Wikipedia:Featured articles, is an indicator that Wallace and NWA are likely the same person. Additionally, the barnstar awarder, "Bonafide.hustla", was renamed to Certified.Gangsta, who was renamed to NWA.Rep. →Στc. 02:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete immediately. "China=Shame" in big letters should be removed right now. The tag says no blanking. But removing that statement isn't blanking, and I would like to do so now. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yet Taiwan=shame is somehow acceptable for an admin? (User:Jiang [[
File:Happy_Happy_Happy2.jpg]] Why wasn't his page nominated for deletion? Why isn't the blatantly racist image including slanderous statements against Taiwanese nationalist heroes and Dalai Lama deleted?) Loving the hypocrisy here. So much for NPOV. Obviously 23 million Taiwanese vs. 1.3 billion Chinese. Do the math...My page was already nominated for deletion and the result was a speedy keep Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta, numerous AN/I threads throughout the years, Wikipedia talk:User pages/UI spoofing now chronicled in WP:LAME. Either force everyone to delete political/nationalistic content or don't make anyone delete them. It is bullshit (for a lack of better words) that I'm getting singled out and crucified just because I'm running for ArbCom. Keep wasting everyone's time. Keep bringing up this long-resolved issue. Keep harassing me. It's obvious that a big clique of people here are trying to piss me off enough to I would leave Wikipedia again. Congratulation you're succeeding. What more do you want?--NWA.Rep (talk) 09:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You object to Jiang's page and approve of your own? That's hipocrisy. You know perfectly well that such polemical statements chase away editors, yet you are running for ArbCom to help the project? Bizarre. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Get Jiang, an admin, to remove his and I will remove mine. Simple as that. I've been treated like shit the entire time I have been here by Jiang and his cronies from WP:China especially Ideogram. Go ask Bishonen about it. She knows the whole story. This entire frivolous Mfd is the epitome of hypocrisy especially when Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Certified.Gangsta (Certified.Gangsta now redirects to me) already resolved this long ago and the result was a speedy keep. Stop gaming the rules to try to sneak this mfd through when it has been decisively resolved long ago. Stop harassing me. Stop trying to drive me out of this project. Stop wasting my time. Stop wasting the community's time.--NWA.Rep (talk) 09:54, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did a quick browse through Anna's history. You are hardly a neutral voice here. You created this category Category:People's_Republic_of_China_administrative_division_templates, which puts you firmly in the anti-Taiwan camp. Like 2008, it's a David vs. Goliath battle.--NWA.Rep (talk) 09:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Anti-Taiwan? I'm apolitical. I removed Jiang's polemical image. Per my talk, I don't give a hoot about the history of this stupid crusade. I only need to read WP:UP#POLEMIC and look at your user pages. This is an encyclopedia of which I am protective. People see your and jiang's page and decide that it's not the place they want to work, and that's bad for the project. Period! This is a simple matter. Your reaction to jiang is to do the exact same thing and cry hipocrisy is absurd. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck with that. It's only a matter of time before Jiang and other unsavoury admins from WP:China block you for disruption. This [5] is among my first edit in Wikipedia almost 6 years ago. Notice the similarity to what you just did? This is gonna be fun. Go read it. I was a passionate newbie on here in early 2006 and see how Jiang destroyed me [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]--NWA.Rep (talk) 10:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Similarity? I'm certainly noticing a similarity between you and jiang. :)
And nobody's going to block me for anything. I have no enemies here because I am reasonable and abide by policy and the wishes of the community. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And you don't think I was full of love, passion, and faith in this project when I first signed up back in early 2006? Go read my candidate statement and read about the crap I have been through here. Go check out my block log. I was blocked for 24 hours by Jiang's friend User:Nlu (a fellow Chinese editor who, along with Jiang gang patrol Taiwan-China related articles and actively and systematically recruit, groom, and canvass with like minded editors in WP:China to uphold pro-China POV in these articles and essentially use these like-minded editors with no admin aspiration as their "bad hand" account for example: major sockpuppeteer User:RevolverOcelotX, User:Sumple, User:Ideogram, admin User:Enochlau, User:HongQiGong User:Blueshirts User:yuje User:AQu01rius [[User:Redcloud822) for "personal attack against Jiang" when I persisted to get him to remove the said image a few days after signing up here. I was insulted by administrators when I, as a powerless newbie, begged them to look at this issue on AN/I. I was blocked again for 48 hours by Jiang's friend Nlu a few days after for "personal attack". I was blocked a few days later in March 2006, less than a month after I signed up here, for a week by Nlu for "personal attack against Jiang and trolling". That's my Wikipedia newbie experience in a nutshell. Notice the double standard here? Where were all these indignant, upright folks who talk about being reasonable and abide by policy and the wishes of the community huh? It wasn't until Bishonen spotted me ranting and crying for help on AN/I that she took me under her wings and helped me understand ins-and-outs and the intricacies of Wikipedia. But by then the damage was done. So go take your moral grandstanding elsewhere and go read my candidate statement. This is what my candidacy is about at the end of the day. I want to give every newbie a shot to contribute. I don't wish my newbie experience to happen to anybody even my worst enemy. But the sad truth is it is happening everyday in the so-called "frontiers" of Wikipedia. People wonder why I am so cynical, why I am going off on admin abuse in my candidate statement. None of you has ever been in my shoes. None of you has ever taken as much abuse on this project. From getting wiki-stalked by rogue admins you had run-ins with and people you are in unrelated content disputes with to the now infamous Wikipedia talk:User pages/UI spoofing that lost me a night of sleep, to community-banned emotionally-unstable Ideogram's deliberate effort to drive me out the project [16] Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram. It took me 3 years to get over the pain and now I volunteer my time to run for ArbCom for this? I don't deserve this. NO one does. --NWA.Rep (talk) 10:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You must really type fast! :) Well, I'm really not grandstanding. I'm not your enemy. I just call 'em as I see 'em. Both pictures are offensive to the target groups. That's bad for the project. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:12, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:NWA.Rep&oldid=1088113077"