Praxidicae

So, you have decided to bring your rampage here. You do absolutely nothing useful here, just waltz in and start deleting without any attempt of discussion or, indeed, the tiniest understanding of even the language of this project - if that's not overstepping the bounds of your powers, then what is? Or do you believe you may do whatever you want in any project without any kind of responsibility at all? I may doubt some of Risto Rekola's methods but the way you are acting is nothing but neocolonial paternalism, thinking you can make decisions for whole communities that are only allowed to watch your devastation in silence. Now, please pick up your petty revenge, go away, and don't come back. Shoo. --Ehitaja (arutelu) 14. september 2019, kell 01:03 (EEST)

are you going to provide a diff or just continue attacking me everywhere?Praxidicae (arutelu) 14. september 2019, kell 01:16 (EEST)

Well, there are about four projects on which I have been more or less active (on one of those, since 2004). Now, you trample into two of those like a Soviet commissary and start shooting randomly, based on your personal agenda. For me, that's not an acceptable behaviour. So, yes, if in your weird worldview anyone telling you "please don't crap in my living room" is an attacker, then, indeed, I'm attacking you. I'd much prefer if you did respect the autonomy of local communities, but obviously, I can't always get what I want. Still, I think that, despite your inability of seeing your own intrusive behaviour in the local context, if you are half competent as a Wikipedian, you are able to find the diffs of your own edits here, thank you very much. I've also raised the question of your behaviour (and, the question of Risto Rekola's contributive remains, which are definitely peculiar but not half as offensive and disruptive as your non-contribution) in the village pump. You're welcome to apologize and explain your motives there, preferrably in Estonian. --Ehitaja (arutelu) 14. september 2019, kell 01:32 (EEST)

Ehitaja, how is removing spam a "personal agenda"? If you have any issue with one of her specific actions other than your unsupported claim of a "rampage", I would be happy to review it in my capacity as another Global Sysop, however the way you're going about this is unacceptable. I consider it a serious personal attack to compare someone to a Soviet Commissar, especially when you say "shooting randomly" in the same sentence. I will also note that aiding a globally locked user in evading their global lock is disruptive. Best regards, Vermont (arutelu) 14. september 2019, kell 03:17 (EEST)

So, will aiding and abetting a public enemy become a reason to add me into the proscription lists as well? And after that veiled threat, you're protesting a comparison with a Soviet Commissar? An excellent idea. Well, as long as I'm still alive: whether an article about someone constitutes spam or not, is a decision that has to be made by the local community. That autonomy is one of the basic principles of the Wikimedia projects. Right now, we have a person who has no idea or interest about local context or even language, riding in on a high horse, deleting content and spamming random deletion notes without even a single attempt of discussion with the unwashed natives. That, like I said, is neocolonial paternalism, a modern version of the "White Man's Burden". And the fact that instead of argumentation, the colonizer starts bringing in friends making threats towards anyone who dares to question the validity of robbing the local communities of their autonomy, does not actually support their case much. Again, to be clear: whatever personal issue anyone in the English Wikipedia has with Risto Rekola, the decisions about keeping or deleting his article or any of his edits on another project should be made by the local community, not by some imported ruler of the world. If you were not aware that notability varies across projects, just take a look at the Finnish and Estonian Wikipedias where the community has decided to keep his article. Putting random deletion notes across his edits, without being capable to understand what's written there, what merits a particular article might or might not have or, indeed, on which very principles the content's validity is judged in the local community (shall we keep and translate it? should it be broken into a wealth of smaller pages? should it be transferred to a sister project, possibly in another language?) - that's estimating oneself more important and one's judgement more capable that any community possibly could be or have. That's not even arrogance, that's mania grandiosa. --Ehitaja (arutelu) 14. september 2019, kell 03:44 (EEST)

Ehitaja If you cannot be civil, refrain from editing my talk page. Your accusations are way out of line. Praxidicae (arutelu) 14. september 2019, kell 16:25 (EEST)