GerardM, in case you have ping disabled: please respond to https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=628906070&oldid=628889104. As I mentioned there, you may take your time for a response if it helps you.
Topic on User talk:GerardM
GerardM, a comment regarding the same case: I still expect action by you as a response to my WD:AN comment of Friday: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=628968933&oldid=628948562. You have been relatively active in the past two days, and even edited WD:AN in another case. I thus assume that you are aware of my linked comment for a while now.
So, do you still plan to take action here, and when can I expect this to happen? As I outlined at WD:AN, your comment of Friday morning is inacceptable, and this holds as long as it stands unmodified. If you don’t want to modify it to remove the defamatory speech part, I explicitly consider that you insist on this claim, which is a personal attack against another user. In that case, I will remove it.
You sent an email to me today at ~16:00 CET. This is my response to your email. It is intentionally public, since it does not contain any private information.
Sorry for using common abbreviations in this topic. "WD:AN" is the Administrators' noticeboard, where the case about the dispute is dealt with. I always provided relevant links in my messages.
The problem with your defamatory speech (“… telling others that they are complete idiots …”) is that it clearly attacks User:Russian Rocky's reputation on a personal level, while it does not add anything to the discussion about the label that was in question. If that user had said what you have claimed, he would have been blocked for it—but he didn’t do so. The part of your comment which is in question here was completely inappropriate, even in the heated situation and under generous consideration of the style of activity of the other side in this dispute.
So this phrase as cited above needs to be fixed, and I offer you to do it by yourself as I suggested here. Otherwise I need to do it, and I would have to state that you insist on defamatory speech (i.e. on a personal attack). Your responsibility for your comments does not decay with time.
The label itself seems to be settled indeed. You don’t need to fix anything there.
Other cases at the Administrators' noticeboard or Jura1's comment in this topic do not matter here.
Hoi,
First: when I send you a mail it is not for you to decide that your answer to a mail may be public. That is a form of abuse.
Second: you agree that the response I got was abusive. While I agree that the word "complete idiot" was not used literally, it is quite obvious that his hostile actions, his disparaging use of English Wikipedia standards, the notion that I am not a native of an English speaking nation is exactly that... intended to make me feel inferior. FYI I have lived in the UK for several years, my colleagues at a UK government organisation indicated that my English was better than theirs.
Third: by threatening with sanctions, you victimise the victim. This guy has not even bothered to add information to his user profile and he is well versed in Wikipedia lore so he got away with it. By insisting that I should make an edit you are abusive.
Fourth: as I indicated before, for me this is about how we treat each other. We do treat each other with hostility. Jura1's comment is a perfect example. He had the audacity to tell me not to edit the [https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?&q=3773745 governors of Vermont]. I am done with them and, as you can see they are much better as a result.
Fifth: I was recently told that I use tools. I am unapologetic about that. It is what made Wikidata possible in the first place. However, when you analyse my work, you will notice that I have always done a substantial amount of manual edits. When I add awards, I often add missing people to complete the list of people who won the award (it is why my watch list is unmanageable). When I added Date of Deaths, I added information like "educated at" "employed at" to fill up not only the data on the person involved but also to the persons they are connected to in that fashion. The objective has always been to enrich the data and make it more informative.
Sixth: if there is one person who documents the work that he does, it is me. I [https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/ blog about everything Wiki] for over many years now. So you could be aware of how I work and what I have learned in the progress.
Finally: for me this has been about how we deal with each other. It can be characterised as abusive, not listening to the arguments of others and then thinking that quit is the same as consensus. When you are interested I will send you PRIVATELY a few other examples of abuse I encountered (you can let me know by mail). Thanks,
We always communicate publicly, and I see no reason not to do so here. It would in fact be highly problematic if I switched to private communication.
I do explicitly disagree that any of the comments you got by User:Russian Rocky in the edit summaries was abusive, or that their words transported “complete idiot” or anything remotely similar. Revert edit wars typically aren’t friendly as this one wasn’t either, but there is a wide gap between “not friendly” and “abusive”. His actions did not in any way legitimate you to start a personal attack against him. From the administrative viewpoint you made the only inacceptable comment in this case. You apparently insist not to modify it by yourself. Is this correct?
I have no difficulties to ignore comments like Jura1’s in situations like these. We are not going to contract both cases. Furthermore, for the assessment of your comment it is not of relevance what you otherwise achieve at Wikidata. I know that this project means a lot to you, and that you spent great effort in many regards. Yet, “no personal attacks” also applies to power users.
So be it. It happens that the Wikimedia Foundation does have a way to address abuse.
For your information: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard&curid=276599&diff=629992385&oldid=629980194. I have now made sure that your claim which we discussed at the Administrators' noticeboard and here is not misunderstood any longer. You receive a 6 hours block for this personal attack, which you unfortunately refused to retract by yourself.