Why not !

I thank you for changing cisman on that page, I've done so repeatedly. There's an editor, however, who will rudely change it back (and probably insult you in the bargain). Be warned! Czolgolz 22:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I need to understand about WP Policy.

In Voice Feminization AlexR has been making repeated reverts (4 in less than 24 hours on 22 May 2006. These revisions revolve around two words ciswoman and woman (see Talk:Voice_feminization#RFC for summary of changes.)

I believe the content of cisgender was modified reprehensibly just to prove a point. Which I believe is against quoted policy. And the same policy states to act Civility but AlexR is rude, judgmental and is constantly belittling contributors because of their language skills or word choice plus using profanity (see history[1] 17:55, 22 May 2006 )

My question is, as a new user can I use the Templates in Template_messages/Disputes to get the offending and untrue entries looked at in cisgender and bring AlexR's dishonorable actions to light? I know I can be bold and just remove them, but I don't want to start another edit war with this individual. I want the constant reverts to stop and the arguments to cease. I hope that if I act rationally and civilly, even though I am less than a week and AlexR has been here since 26 Dec 2006, that I should be treated fairly.

And finally, there are also templates in Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. As a new user am I allowed to use them? Are there any guidelines for their use?

Thank you,

Yes anyone can add a Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes to a page. Yes anyone can add a Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace to a user's talk page (although a personal message would be better, templates like that are generally reserved for vandalism and there isn't any vandalism going on in this case).

The article RfC that has been filed is just about content. Don't make it personal, on the article's talk page only discuss content not editors.

About the civility and things, I think the user is being generally reasonable, just let it go (forget it) and try to work on the article. I will post a short message on AlexR's talk page, I think that's all that is required.--Commander Keane 11:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "You were using the term ciswoman as interchangeable with woman". That is such a mischaracterisation that it is insulting. I made those changes precisely because you wrote "women" and obviously meant "ciswomen". And btw, I changed it to "cisgender" women, not that abominal "cisgendered". Same as with transgendered that is not a word, that is an abomination, since transgender -- and therefore, cisgender -- are already both nouns and adjectives. Also, ciswoman and cismen are not neologisms, they are analogously coined. I also can't really take your "that is what I wanted" serious, since if that had been what you wanted, you could have done so yourself. As for your civil-substs, you can put as many of them on my talk page as you want, I will just delete them.

You were insulting, both to me and to all transpeople, you have filled talkpages with mindless rants, you say I have done things that are the precise opposite I have done, you insulted me and lied about me, and you reverted the article several times just out of spite, with no arguments whatsover, to an incorrect and insulting version. And that is not even mentioning what you did in your previous incarnation. So if you claim that I have been incivil, that was at the very least a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Unlike you, though, I did not, while on the talk page claiming otherwise, state that transwomen were no "women" and transmen therefore are.

So you can cut the crap about agreeing with my work, because I sincerely doubt you understood anything about it. You at least did not understand what I said on the talk page. And regarding the welcome message -- I have never put one of those on any talk page, and I would certainly not put it on the talk page of a person who, just because she did it, claims to be an expert, and writes articles that ignore both transmen and non-transsexual transgender people, and then whines for days over edits to "her" articles. Sorry, but as far as I am concerned, you have shown no reason whatsoever that would make me welcome you here. Maybe that will change, but that would require some serious improvements in your manners and style. Until that admittedly highly unlikely event, I sure hope we don't run into each other again. -- AlexR 16:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think I agree with Comander Keen, we should just let it go. Alex is obviously not interested in discussion, at least not without insults. I'm going to set my sights on my favorite articles, such as Pachuca, Mexico. Hope to see more articles from you. Czolgolz 01:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be interesting to see how Alex responds to this. Hey, are you the same as Voice of One, or different? 01:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm sorry that VOO dropped wiki, she wrote a good article. Alex tends to think discussion means being abusive to those who don't agree with him. Give my love to VOO and I hope to see more from you. PS If you read Alex's talk pages, it's funny to see him repeatedly warned by the administration (before he deletes them) Czolgolz 22:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, looks like Alex took his bat and ball and went home. He's trying to make it look like it was you, but in reality, several editors warned him they were going to block him if he didn't watch it. So good for you for helping make wikipedia a kinder place. Czolgolz 02:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[2]

I did look at the comments on Voice feminization before, actually, and though I don't agree with everything you said here, I think it's pretty clear that "cisman" and "ciswoman" aren't well-accepted enough, yet, to be mentioned in an encyclopedia entry. I was originally in favor of including the terms because I've heard people use them, but of course, I've heard people use a lot of terms that don't merit inclusion here. Catamorphism 17:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm insatiably curious, what can I say? The original article seemed reasonable enough, but the "1995" assertion is clearly false; that's why it's important for people to question unsourced assertions, as you're doing. Catamorphism 22:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

honestum tāle est ut vel sī ignōrarent id hominēs suā tamen pulchritūdine laudābile esset

FemVoice 00:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about learning German? Your comments don't even make sense. And I don't want them on my talk page, so I delete them immediately. So stop bothering. And you might try to understand what you read, too -- your references to the reference guidelines don't exactly sound as if you understand them. Which is hardly surprising. And BTW, your article on Voice feminization still is very short on your precious references, too. So what exactly are you complaing about? -- AlexR 14:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FemVoice, thanks for your comment on my talk page. It does look like a problem. I think if a high density of someone's edits are personal attacks, and if they've been warned enough times, someone can make a request to an admin to block them, at least for a while. I may try to do that if things don't get better. --Allen 01:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...So I modified it per your request. Thank you for giving me a chance to do it however. Chooserr 06:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since I revert your "comments" on my talk page without reading, you can stop wasting my time and yours by staying away. I might also add that you have no idea whatsover why I left the German WP, so stop making up slandering stories. -- AlexR 06:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may add your comments if you'd like. Catamorphism 11:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've entered this as a mediator, I'm not sure there is much debate remaining, but I hope we can find some form of agreement where everyone is, well, at least non-combative... Are you happy with the page in its current state? With the definitions of cisman and ciswoman included? I understand and share a concern with regard to the need for sources but like you said earlier on Talk:Cisgender removing this would probably make it a suitable idea to remove the redirect pages for cisman and ciswoman as well. Usrnme h8er 16:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since AlexR has chosen not to partake in the mediation, I'm going to have to consider the mediation to have reached a consensus... Do you feel that you and User:Catamorphism can agree about page content on the talk page? Or do you want the mediation to remain open? --Usrnme h8er 20:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure that AlexR will be back, but for now, would you like to clean help clean up cisgender, or would you trust me to start and you see if you would agree, given that I would support each of my changes in the talk section of the article? And, if I thought controversial, would defer to you since you seem to be the more open of our two minds.

Feel free to do what you can; I'll do what I can, as well, which may not include overhauling the whole article, as (contrary to appearances) I do have other responsibilities :-) Catamorphism 06:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whom do you think you can fool with your odd mixture of threats and your dishones compliments? And who gives you the right to delete content from my talk page, and fill it yet again with your insincere rants? Do you seriously expect me to just forget the lies you told about me and the slander you spread around? You don't even bother to appologise for them and your harassment. Mind you, I may not have been at my best myself, but I didn't get completely hysterical over two minor changes in "your" article and went out to harass anybody. I can easily understand why you are hard to work with, after having been harassed by you for weeks.

I also intend to neither work "with you" not "against you". You do not seem to understand that some people are here because they care about Wikipedia, not their egos, which must be your motivation here, judging from this remark. I couldn't care less about you personaly, all I care about is whether you improve Wikipedia or not. (And, given your recent behaviour, whether you stop harassing me.) Which means your edit will not be judged by the fact that they are yours, but by their content.

Should you, however, just because I refuse your offer of "working together" (something I sincerely doubt you would be able to anyway; and I certainly do not wish to have anything to do with you in the future), you start working against me, you will find yourself on the receiving end of of a dispute resolution, and in places where no would-be moderator can close cases just as he likes, either. The same goes for other threads, like putting up Cisgender for deletion -- that has already been tried, and there is no reason you are going to be any more successfull. The thread does show, however, that it is certainly not the improvement of Wikipedia you have in mind. I really don't wish to spend more time on this nutcase case, but if you force me, then you - and you alone - are responsible for the result.

So kindly leave me in peace and stop harassing me. (That includes further deletions and/or comments on my talk page.) It will probably be inevitable that we meet again, but I would very much appreciate if you would try to stick to the issued at hand, and not get personal. I am definitely not interested in any personal communication with you. Neither now, nor in the future. -- AlexR 20:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]