Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Anittas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copied from WP:AN/I[edit]

The following is an accurate copy of relevant discussion on WP:AN/I as of 05:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC). Please make further comments in a separate section.

User:Anittas, with whom I have interacted in the past, to the best of my recollection not always unfavorably, has made an anti-Semitic remark directed at another user. I took umbrage at this. I left a note on his talk page. I asked him to retract and apologize, which he apparently will not do. I also added—and I will stand by this—"Almost no amount of good conduct can make up for something like this in my eyes. And if you want to consider my remarks here a personal attack, fine, we can have our RfC now." Apparently, he does not intend to retract or apologize, and does consider my statement a personal attack, because his response was Okay. Start a RfC on me.

Which is just what I intend to do, but so far I appear to be the only user who has contacted Annitas to raise the issue. As I understand it, at least one other person must sing on for an RfC to have standing. I would greatly appreciate it if someone else, preferably also an admin, and in any case willing to sign on to an RfC if they get a similar result, would approach this user about this, so that there is standing for me to proceed with this. Meanwhile, I will begin to draft the RfC at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Anittas. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will not apologize to Node because Jmabel's accusation against me is false; and I dismissed his accusation on my talk-page by clarifying that the comment was not meant to be anti-Semetic and that I am not anti-Semetic. I cannot apologize for something that was not said by me in the context that Jmabel puts it. I told Jmabel to start a RfC on me, on this subject, because I'm confident that I can prove my case with reason and documentation. I also didn't like the tone that Jmabel used on me, plus the fact that he didn't come to my talk-page to first investigate the matter, but only to give me an ultimatum by forcing me to apologize; and then threaten to have me banned for as long as possible. If a RfC is started on me, I would like to be informed about it on my talk-page, and, I would like to be given 12-hours, from the time that I was notified, to build on my case. --Anittas 01:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that people read my comment on Annitas user talk page, rather than accept his summary of it. And they should certainly also look for themselves at his original remark that triggered this. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest deep breaths on both sides and honest attempts to engage in dialogue that's a little less hostile. We don't need drama like this over a single ill-advised remark, no matter how much offense it gave. JRM · Talk 01:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Moldoveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeean. Is that offensive? - Xed 02:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
To the best of my knowledge, no. Not being of the ethnic group in question, I'm not sure. In my experience as a Jew, what Anittas wrote, when spoken in person, is usually followed by a fist or a rock. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably why Wikipedia should not be confused with meatspace, or RfCs with rocks. JRM · Talk 02:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it was appropriate for Annitas to make such a remark, but I'm suprised that Jmabel is getting so worked up over this. On an RfC regarding numerous uncivil remarks made by User:Deeceevoice, Jmabel defended her and ended his summary with ""Cry me a river, white boy." (This was also the edit summary) [1]. I was under the impression that Jmabel's tolerance for incivility was much higher. Carbonite | Talk 02:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's pretty shocking. I can only guess Jmabel would find "Cry me a river, Jew boy" acceptable, but would be offended if the vowels were repeated. - Xed 02:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, Xed, aren't you the charming one?
Spoken by another Jew? Possibly harmless, even jokey. Spoken by a Gentile? Nasty, but I've never had that one followed by a physical attack. Being called "Jew boy" usually means "go away, you're not wanted". What Anittas wrote is usually about 5 seconds before a fist slams into your face. Also, I suggest that you might want to look at the context in which I quoted that remark before presuming my intent. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How many extra vowels are needed before this violent intent becomes obvious? - Xed 04:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How cute. Can we possibly take this discussion elsewhere, like the talk page of the RfC? This is getting to be a bit much for AN/I. I'll copy the discussion there.
Looking over the history of User talk:Anittas, I note that User:Sam Spade [2] and User:SlimVirgin [3] have both requested that User:Anittas review WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. User:Kelly Martin has also expressed concern about that user's editing, as has User:Durin. I suggest that User:Jmabel may find that there are other editors who have attempted to resolve problems in the past and can certify an RfC. Jkelly 02:53, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've previously cautioned Anittas about his behavior on several occasions. This instance does not surprise me. I've just left a note on his talk page, and will likely certify the RFC. FeloniousMonk 03:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will support an RFC against Anittas. He repeadedly made offensive comments at Node ue's sexual orientation. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Per remark above, I am copying the discussion so far to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Anittas, because this is getting to be a bit much for AN/I. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[end copied material]

How many vowels?[edit]

Xed asks above—I'm not sure whether seriously or in jest—How many extra vowels are needed before this violent intent becomes obvious? To answer in more or less the same tone: I would hesitate to state a minimum, but this is well over the line.

But perhaps Xed has read only one word of the remark I was objecting to. I've avoided quoting it on people's user pages, and on WP:AN/I, but here it is:

Moldavians and Moldovans call themselves the same (Moldovean). You are neither. You are a Jew. A Jewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!! --Anittas 14:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Anittas is clearly aware of the difference between calling someone "a Jew" and calling them "A Jewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!".
  2. In the first part of the remark, quite independent of the one word Xed singles out: "Moldavians and Moldovans call themselves the same (Moldovean). You are neither. You are a Jew." Xed, I don't know where you are from, but since you appear to write American English, I'll guess the U.S. If I'm wrong, just substitute your own country in the following: "You are not American. You are a Jew." Right there, that would already have been offensive, but I probably would not have considered an RfC over it.
  3. This is not the first time Anittas has insulted the person at whom he directed this. Indeed, less than three hours before this particular remark, on that same page, I wrote, "Again, if you feel you have a bona fide complaint against Node, start an RfC and seek mediation or arbitration. If not, please stop the personal attacks on this page."
  4. All of this is exacerbated, at least in my view, by the fact that Moldavia is a place where there have been pogroms in living memory.

I am (barely) willing to believe Anittas protest that he is "not an anti-Semite", but if so he did a rather convincing imitation of one with this remark. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should have asked how many consonants. You are calling someone an anti-semite on the basis that you are a Jew who has been called a Jew. You are slurring an entire people because of "pogroms in living memory". How would you like it if the same standard was held for you - Jmabel can't mention buildings because some helicopter gunship in the West Bank has destroyed one. Don't you see how ridiculous that is? - Xed 09:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Joe - saying to someone "You are not American. You are a Jew" is not discriminatory/racist, just as "You are not Romanian. You are Estonian" isn't. However, I believe that Anittas has been quite uncivil at various times through his talk page messages at Wikipedia. The "Jewwww" remark is not all that offensive, in comparison to the statements he made on sexual orientation, which were quite offensive. As to Anittas' anti-Semitism, I think Anittas is not anti-Semitic at all. Maybe anti-gay (which is just as bad) but not anti-Semitic - just look at User talk:NazismIsntCool where he quite vehemently defended that user against people like SamSpade who were urging her to change her name in order to "not offend Nazis". Look at this own page too: User:Anittas, where it says "Death to all Nazis! HAHA!" ([4]). Still, I think ad hominem attacks in general are quite uncivil, and a lot of them have been made at Talk:Moldovan language. Ronline ✉ 06:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ronline: 2 comments, neither intended as hostile to you, and I hope they won't be taken as hostile:
  1. Plenty of people dislike both Nazis and Jews. (I would venture unhesitatingly that you could find millions of such people in France, for example. Or Poland.) Disliking Nazis is no proof of not being an anti-Semite. In any event, I didn't say that Anittas is an anti-Semite, I said his remark was anti-Semitic. I gave him the opportunity to distance himself from the remark by retracting it. He turned that down. And, as noted above, I had told him, on that very page, less than three hours earlier, to stop harrassing Node.
  2. As an American and a Jew, if someone says to me, even without the drawn-out pronunciation of Jew, "You're not American. You're a Jew", those are fighting words. It's not like "You are not Romanian. You are Estonian". It's more like "You are not Romanian. You are Catholic," which I'm sure has been said, and which I would find roughly equally offensive, except that, to the best of my knowledge, Romania hasn't had pogroms against Catholics in living memory. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
But he is not Moldovan, he is Jew. Fact. He thinks he's Moldovan. He was not born there, he doesn't know the people, the culture, the language, or anything, except for the things he picked from the net and some of his friends. --Anittas 09:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think you better stop with these personal attacks. More evidence has been provided for your own hatred of whites on this RFC than any anti-semitism by Anittas. - Xed 09:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"White boy"[edit]

Carbonite and Xed both make comparisons to this edit of mine, in which I used the expression "Cry me a river, white boy." To give it its full context:

Deeceevoice is one of the best contributors I've worked with on Wikipedia. Definitely not the queen of mellow, but that's not what we are here for. In terms of civility, she is certainly more sinned against than sinning. Yes, occasionally she takes offense sooner than she might, but, in case you folk haven't noticed, on the whole she is doing good work in an often hostile environment. On the whole, my response to the complaints above can be summed up in the words of a certain ex-girlfriend of mine in a similar situation (I was not, by the way, the person toward whom it was directed): "Cry me a river, white boy." -- Jmabel | Talk 01:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

A few remarks.

  1. I'm white. More precisely, I'm an Ashkenazi Jew, but by the contemporary American construction of race, and increasingly so in my lifetime, that makes me "white".
  2. The meaning of my remark, if there is any doubt (though I think it was read correctly, even by those who resented it), is that I have a limited willingness to listen to White men complaining about the hostile environment a lone Black woman is somehow creating. And this was accompanied by my acknowledging twice in the same paragraph that their grievance was not entirely without merit. And I apologized to one person (Matt Crypto who sort of got caught in the crossfire, and to whom I did not think my comments applied. By the way, if people think I was wrong or alone in my perception of what was going on, you might want to look at a sequence of discussion on User:Matt Crypto's page: [5]. The RfC in question (clearly started in good faith by Matt Crypto, but hijacked by others) seems to have resulted in two of the best African American contributors (deeceevoice herself and Alabamaboy) leaving Wikipedia indefinitely.
  3. Xed writes—I hope in good faith—"I can only guess Jmabel would find 'Cry me a river, Jew boy' acceptable…" Besides what I've remarked above, the use of "Jew" as an adjective is all on its own pretty offensive. "Jewish boy"? Not much problem with that, although at 51 I'm a bit old to be called "boy" by anyone I'm not sexually involved with.

-- Jmabel | Talk 05:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


"I have a limited willingness to listen to White men complaining about the hostile environment a lone Black woman is somehow creating"

It's indeed amazing that you are defending the personal and racist attacks posted by a black woman, such as:

"YOU (white folks) celebrate a holiday named in honor of a racist, slaveholding, slave trading cracker." [6]

If Wikipedia wants to be intimidated by a handful of Zionist azzholes who can't stand to read a differing opinion, then that's pretty pathetic. [7]

Most white folks, I think are simply ignorant by default [8]

LOL! You're an ASIAN, and you wanna talk about the size of someone's balls? ROFLMBAO. (slappin' sides) [9]

I find such images and the display of so much pink flesh distasteful [10]

You come off looking like an even bigger jackass. ... I don't give a shyt what you think. You're nothing but a weasel [11]

Stop buggin', bwoi. Go preach to someone who gives a damn. You're boring me. *yawn* [12]

dang, bwoi. You a fool. :-p . [13]

it amazes me that people have nothing better to do on this website than play Miss Manners with other adults like prissy, pedantic, insufferable, niggling, mealy-mouthed, self-righteous, tattletale brats... But take your RfC and -- well ... I think you get the idea. [14]


but get so worked up over some additional vowels. I sense some major double standards as well. posted by {84.178.243.86}

Anittas should apologize, this is not a matter for restrictive action[edit]

I think Anittas should apologize for his comment, at least to apologize to Jmabel or to apologize in general, since he may not want to apologize to Node. Otherwise, I see no indication that Anittas is anti-Semitic, and he may have simply not realized the implications of his statement. On its own, this comment from Anittas, especially if apologized for by him, does not deserve any actions to be taken against the User, even though as I made clear before I think the comment was way out of line (though it was provoked by User:Node ue). Alexander 007 06:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresentation[edit]

Possibly inadvertantly, Annitas has twice misrepresented what I wrote on his user talk page, first in the conversation from WP:AN/I (reproduced above) and now on the RfC itself.

First an aside: Anittas, I didn't have any sinister intent in failing to mention to you that I brought this to WP:AN/I. You basically challenged me to start an RfC. They can't be started singlehandedly, one needs at least one other person to certify it, so I went to the obvious place to do so. It honestly didn't even cross my mind to inform you I was doing that. I assume that it was a similar matter that you didn't think to inform me that you were mentioning it on the Romanian Wikipedian's notice board.

Anittas writes, "When Jmabel left me the message on my talk-page, he used a hostile tone, accusing me for making an anti-Semetic comment and demanding that I apologize to Node; or else, face a RfC where, and I quote: 'my goal in doing so will be to get you banned from Wikipedia for as long a time as possible.'"

I am quoted accurately, but out of context. Here is what I actually wrote:

In case you are not aware of it, this edit of yours reads, to me, as anti-Semitic. In fact, try as I might, I can't construe it any other way. I suggest that you strike through it, and apologize to the person at whom it was directed. And if I see you make a similar edit again, whether about Jews or any other ethnicity, regardless of whom it is addressed to, be assured that I will start an RfC, and that my goal in doing so will be to get you banned from Wikipedia for as long a time as possible.
Almost no amount of good conduct can make up for something like this in my eyes. And if you want to consider my remarks here a personal attack, fine, we can have our RfC now. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:31, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, the threat to face a hostile RfC was not just if he would not apologize to Node. It is if he would not apologize and would make similar comments in the future. As you can see, the present RfC is not an attempt to get him banned. If he will retract his comment to Node, I will retract my remarks to him. If he leaves it stand, but stops making remarks like this, fine. But, yes, another similar remark will lead to my escalate.

There will be in the future a suspicion if you will not ask also for Node to appologize for his comments on Anittas (where he labelled him as "sperm") and on others users as well (Dpotop, me). Then you can retract your remarks. I don't like double standards you know.. -- Bonaparte talk 13:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also think he is willfully misunderstanding "similar edit", and will admit to having my suspicions, given the mocking tone of his response, that he is willfully misunderstanding it. I believe my comments above on this page clarify the matter, so I won't repeat myself, but if anyone has specific questions, I will answer them. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian usage[edit]

This stuff may seem a bit off-topic, but I brought up the subject and I feel like clarifying. Esti jidan is literally translated as "You are Jew", while esti un jidan is literally translated as "You are a Jew". In both cases, one can say that jidan functions as a noun, but like a professor of mine said, the distinction between noun and adjective is a matter of usage. One can say that in esti jidan (or esti evreu), jidan (evreu) can also be seen as an adjective. The point of this is that I believe a native Romanian speaker is more inclined to say "You are a Jew", rather than "You are Jewish". Add to this the cultural situation in Romania even today, where Jews are very often seen by ethnic Romanians as being a separate ethnicity. I'm sure many Jewish Romanians however consider themselves Romanians, though there are always people on both sides who discriminate; the definition of ethnic group includes religion and culture; a different religion and differences in culture and even differences in ancestry can easily lead to a separate ethnic group being defined; a group within a group.

Whatever the case, Anittas was referring specifically to Node's situation. He was not telling a Jewish Moldovan, born and raised, "You are not a Moldovan, you are a Jew", which I would consider anti-Semitic and incorrect (He would be a Moldovan: a Jewish-Moldovan). Alexander 007 12:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apology[edit]

I would like Jmabel and Monk to apologize to me for damaging my image by accusing me of anti-Semetic feelings. Jmabel never asked me personally what I meant by that remark, and Monk didn't try to solve the dispute. Monk posted on my talk-page when I was working, and 21-minutes later, they signed the petition against me. That's not what I call trying to work things out. These two were never interested in investigating my intent, but rather, they wanted to force me to apologize. Apologize for what? For Node not being a Moldovan, but a Jew? This is silly. Yes, my intent was to make Node understand that he is not a Moldovan. We've told him this a few times, but he won't get it. Perhaps next time, someone needs to extend the word "Jew" and write it in caps. Perhaps then, Node will understand. --Anittas 16:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF[edit]

Four tests need to be applied here:

  1. is it impossible that Anittas's comment was not anti-Semitic?
  2. if you WP:AGF, can you accuse that comment of being anti-Semitic?
  3. given that Jmabel also makes race-ralated comments, isn't it a bit rich this RfC coming from him?
  4. given that Jmabel will not allow anti-Semitic remarks to stand (sic) isn't he violating WP:AGF because he is declaring Anittas's comment anti-Semitic without explaining why? We have to assume that it was not anti-Semitic and it's Jmabel's job to convince us that it was and ONLY if he succeeds, can it be called anti-Semitic. That's how AGF works - presuming innocence. Izehar (talk) 17:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments by Jmabel[edit]

The following comments seem sufficiently on-topic that I am presenting them here rather than the talk page; if someone can suggest a better place for them, I have no problem with that. Other endorsers of the statement of the dispute should not be presumed to have "signed on" to these comments, unless they endorse them separately and explicitly.

I see from the talk page that several people have used the occasion of this RfC to attack me, which I guess happens often enough. If people think my own conduct has been a problem, please start an RfC about me rather than using this one to attack me, because I'd rather not complicate matters by presenting my defense here. Of course, I would prefer not to have such an RfC started at all, but if you are going to criticize me, I believe that would be the appropriate place to do it.

I was really hoping to keep things simple, because I considered the matter so clearcut, and all I was (and am) asking for was retraction, apology and desisting from similar behavior in the future. But apparently it is not that simple.

It is fully possible that Anittas did not intend the remark in question as anti-Semitic. For what it's worth, the last two times that someone called me a Jew and stretched the word out like that were both when I was a teenager. About the age Node claims to be now, as a matter of fact. In one case it was while I was being chased by a crowd of other teens throwing rocks. (They also called me some other choice words that I will not reprint here.) In the other case, it was immediately followed by a punch in the face, and preceded by a remark pretty similar to Anittas's, about my not really being an American. So perhaps I am a bit sensitive on this topic, but not, I think, inappropriately so.

Looking now through the page history, Anittas was not alone in picking on Node; he was not even the worst offender; he was just the one who pushed my personal button. He also happens to have done this less than three hours after this edit of mine, referring to a discussion that Node should be banned from editing the page:

Strongly oppose. You want to start an RfC, and move toward arbitration? Fine. But, otherwise, you don't have any right to tell someone he cannot edit. I think some of his views here are misguided, but I also think he's helped strengthen our thinking about the topic. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:02, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't really want to start an RfC about each person who insulted Node. What I want is for them to stop. Perhaps this was not the best vehicle to do so. At this point, I won't even worry about an apology, and will take at face value Anittas's claim that the remark was not intended as anti-Semitic, although I hope he will take my word that I sure heard it that way and I'm not just making this up to be mean to him or something like that. I will, however, use this relatively public forum to ask him and others—as I say, looking through the history, his remarks are by no means the worst—to cease attacking Node over Node's ethnicity and sexual orientation, and that if they want to attack his editing as inappropriate (which some of it may be; he has probably at least skirted the line at times) that they do so through an RfC, mediation, arbitration, etc., not through personal attacks on talk pages of articles and claims that he shouldn't be allowed to edit. (By the way, on this last, Anittas position appears to be that he'd like Node banned from the page, but unlike some, he understood that people cannot "vote him off the island". [15] [16])

Which is to say, again, given the whole history here, I may have singled out the wrong person because of the timing and specific nature of Anittas's' remark, but my general grievance over the tone of the remarks on some of these talk pages still stands, and Anittas was a contributor to that tone although, now that I look through the history, certainly not the worst offender. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Look, dude, I don't care what people are. No one is born guilty and I got no issues with Jews. You took it personal, relating my comment to your childhood years. If you want, we can forget about this whole issue and go back to status-quo. You took the first offensive. You even endorsed Mel's RfC, which is several months old, just to make me see what you think of me. Node is unreasonble. You can't compromise with him. When I was alone, in the Moldovan article, he kept laughing in my face by saying that no Romanian agrees with me. He has no class. Today, the situation is different. I tried to get an Arbitration on Node, only to be given empty promises. This Wiki administration is a joke. I waited a couple of weeks for a response from the dude who agreed to do the arbitration, then when he finally arrived, Mikka blocked me for 24-hours. When I told him what happened, he gave me the cold shoulder. I got no issues with Mikka, either and I got no issues with you. My issues are with Node. --Anittas 19:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You will have to apologise to Anittas to resolve the matter. You slurred Anittas as an anti-semite. You implied extra consonants mean violence, equivalent to throwing rocks at you. You indulged in blatant double standards. You trivialised real racism - even talking about pogroms! And you've wasted everyones time by crying wolf. - Xed 19:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's cool. If he agrees to go back to status-quo and forget about everything, I'm willing to do just that. I got no problems with Jmabel, but I still don't like when he says that "it is fully possible that Anittas did not intend the remark in question as anti-Semitic", when I showed that this wasn't the case. In my discussion with Jimbo, when I condemned Nazism, I mentioned about Jews being killed, etc. --Anittas 19:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anittas, initially I honestly had no idea what you are talking about when you say, "You even endorsed Mel's RfC, which is several months old, just to make me see what you think of me." I assume you mean Mel Etitis? Actually, I didn't even notice that you were a party to that (I haven't gone back and checked, but I assume from your remark that you were.) I've worked with Mel, and in the course of filing this RfC I noticed that there was an RfC out about him. I skimmed it; what he said coincided with what I've seen happen on a few articles he is involved in; and I endorsed what he said. End of story, at least as far as I'm concerned. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anittas, I can see that your distancing yourself from anti-Semitic intent is sincere; I still think your words were ill-chosen, but that is another matter.

I'm willing to end this, and to withdraw my initial remark that I made on your talk page; you can choose whether it is deleted, struck through but visible, whatever. I would ask that you strike through your own ill-chosen words, but I won't insist.

However, I am still asking you and others to stop attacking Node on article talk pages. I can see from who has weighed in on this page that at least one of the worst offenders in this respect must have this page watchlisted; I presume he knows who he is, so I won't name names. I ask him to desist as well.

I seriously suggest that if you (that's a plural "you") have a problem with Node's conduct as an editor, start an RfC. The schoolyard bullying (in which I now see that Anittas was only a minor participant) does not belong in Wikipedia. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Comment. There is also the possibility that he wanted to underscore and make "his point", which was "You're not a Moldovan, you're a Jew". Compare: "You're a lifesaver! A lifesaverrrrrrrr!" Or whatever. Anittas wanted to drive home his "You're a Jew" message. Alexander 007 18:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 2: Doesn't WP:AGF apply anymore? I fail to see how mispelling a word can be "anti-Semitic" as Jmabel puts it. Does anyone here know what anti-Semitism is? Does anyone realise that English may not be Anittas's mother tongue and that what he said might make more sense in his own language? Izehar (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed good faith, figuring that Anittas might have had a stuck key on his keyboard, until I saw his explanation that showed this was not the problem. We're not talking about a "misspelling", this was a deliberate insult. And Anittas has demonstrated plenty of ability with the English language. These arguments are red herrings. --Michael Snow 19:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Anittas apparently has a near-native understanding of English, but perhaps he does not understand how offensive it can be to say in English "You are a Jew". It's possible he wanted to emphasize at the top of his lungs that Node is a Jew--but did he necessarily mean to insult? I'm not sure. Alexander 007 19:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What reason would he have for emphasizing this "at the top of his lungs" to Node that isn't insulting? Even if the motivation wasn't anti-Semitic, it's still basically treating Node like he's an imbecile. --Michael Snow 20:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You said it, with your own words...But look here for proof[[17]].-- Bonaparte talk 20:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You do realize that's a joke page? --Michael Snow 20:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The issue here is whether he was being anti-Semitic---actively, clearly anti-Semitic. His comment is ambiguous, and I see another likely motivation behind it. It's not strong enough evidence to ban him or block him or whatever for alleged anti-Semitism. As pointed out, there are clearer examples of anti-semitism on Talk:Moldovan language, and they should be looked for. Alexander 007 20:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
An insult directed at someone's Jewishness is in some sense anti-Semitic by definition. Anti-Semitism may not have been the motivation, and I haven't said that it was, nor have I said Anittas should be banned or blocked for this. --Michael Snow 20:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you so sure it was an insult? His aim to me, it seems, was to strip him of his Moldovan-ness, not to deride his Jewish-ness. And he wasn't stripping him of his Moldovan-ness by pointing out that he's a Jew---it seems to me that Anittas doesn't view him as a Moldovan primarily because Node is a Jewish-American, born and raised (and Node's never even been to Moldova). The Moldavan factor is two generations back. Alexander 007 20:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Anittas would have avoided ambiguity if he would've said "You're an American Jew" or "You're a Jewish American" (and not a Moldovan, in Anittas' view and others'). Alexander 007 20:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Along with a huge list of Anti-Romanian examples.-- Bonaparte talk 20:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I can link an example where it seems that Anittas did not understand what I was saying in clear English---I was explaining to him that someone's User Name was inciting vandalism, and he apparently thought I meant that that User was perpetrating vandalism. So I leave the door open to cross language confusion. Read this. Alexander 007 19:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That was a simple misunderstanding. When I understood what you said, I still supported the usage of such a nickname - even if it incites others. --Anittas 21:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
We all assume good faith. That's it. Case closed. And I suggest you all of you to calm down or else I will start an RfC against all of you!
I will accuse you of Anti-Romanianism if you don't get it! -- Bonaparte talk 19:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Bonaparte's remark on contribution given by Ghirlandajo on several occasions to Wikipedia's pages[edit]

Look who's talking about! Good joke, Ghirlandajo! What about you Ghirlandajo? They didn't start the RfC against you for nothing I suppose!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Ghirlandajo ????

Just look at his contributions:

  • Calling names, ad hominem attacks and usage of offensive language
    • Calling Poles Polacks [18]
    • When asked to apologize or stay on topic, he replied with [19]
    • Offensive language [20], "zombie", revert zombie, [21],
    • Suggestions of being intoxicated by obscure Polish hack writers, ignorance, ad hominem arguments, calling the arguments of the opponents slurs and hysteria, offensive language, ethnic slurs... all is there, in one edit diff. Also, bizarre accusations of some sort of conspiracy [22]
    • [23] [24] if this statement is a personal opinion of Halibutt, Molobo, Rydel, and Co, you may continue gaping at your cheap Polish propaganda booklets about alleged Russian massacres, which I daresay are "not considered a credible source even by Wikipedia" as well
    • ad hominem attack , later even strengthened; rvv a revert maniac: can't we block him?, [25], [26]
    • [27] racist ethnic generalizations and accuasion of incivility on behalf of the entire Polish nation
    • Removing Belarusan spelling from Belarusan articles and putting Russian spellings instead. For example, [77] - he removed Belarusian spelling from an article about the most famous Belarusian woman and re-instated Russian spelling of her name, with the following comment: "Belarusian spelling is as pertinent as swahili". The same happened with Usiaslau of Polatsk and Euphrosyne of Polatsk (removing the Belarusan spelling with the comment: "outlandish spelling corrected").

So again look who's talking about! -- Bonaparte talk 11:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on outside view by Alexander 007[edit]

Or you could interpret Anittas's comment to mean: "You're not a Moldovan. You have no business editing here because you're a ...." Given Anittas's other antagonistic behavior on Wikipedia, I would conclude that's what he meant. Anittas's belief that only people of a certain background should be allowed to edit ethnic articles is contrary to Wikipedia's spirit of openness. --malber 13:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You could interpret it like that. But we can't prove or even reasonably demonstrate that that's what he meant. If the purpose of this RfC is to punish Anittas based primarily on that very ambiguous comment, that is quite extreme IMO. However, if this RfC is to focus on Anittas' Wiki-conduct in general, then that's another matter. Alexander 007 13:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is not necessarily the content of what he said, it's his response after he was confronted about what he said. Harassment is about perception of the person the comment was directed at, not what was in the mind of the person who made the comment. The person, and several others, were offended by Anittas's comment and they confronted him on it. He refused to accept culpability for his actions, or even apologize for how what he said might be interpreted. This is contrary to WP:CIVIL and is concurrent with other in-civility on Anittas's part. Now is the perfect time to address this. --malber 20:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This logic is very flawed. If anyone that would claim to have been offended, would be given right, then Wiki would turn into an US-court where everyone would sort-of, sue everyone, for everything; such as getting hot coffee on your clothes, etc. What you're saying is that I should simply submit myself to the perspective of the other person who claims to have been harassed. This is not going to happen, nor does Wiki Civ say anything about this. However, vandalizing someone's user- and talk-page, over and over again, the way you did, even when you were being asked to stop, could be perceived as harassment. --Anittas 20:25, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Show evidence of vandalism, Anittas, or shut up. Reverting a page is not vandalism. Telling someone he can't edit Wikipedia because he's a Jew is hate-speak. --malber 02:46, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Show me where I said that he can't edit the page. Mikka put it whole thing in context and showed what I was replying to. Jmabel should have done that, instead. We were talking about ethnics. And you are a vandal. You reverted other user's user page after they themselves reverted it back from your vandalism! You are a vandal from the dark forests of barbarous northern Europe! You hail from the woods! lol --Anittas 05:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The preceding comment by Anittas illustrates, for anyone concerned, that I was not picking out a unique incident of incivility or insulting people based on their backgrounds, and should lay to rest any claims that I must have been misinterpreting because he would never do such a thing. Perhaps he is telling the truth that in the particular case about which I brought an RFC this is not what he was doing. Perhaps I myself am the most trusting person on Wikipedia. Perhaps pigs have wings. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you're trying to say, and I'll rather not try and interpret your sarcasm, but if you're trying to imply that I lie, then let me know and I'll know to not to waste further of my time on this. --Anittas 04:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The following is silly[edit]

I am a Jew. I am a Jeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!! But I don't keep kosher. :-) — Rickyrab | Talk 05:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I only offended myself with that remark. :) — Rickyrab | Talk 05:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Anittas&oldid=1137447337"