Talk:Steven van de Velde: Difference between revisions

:::::While I would still prioritise the notability element (and I feel phrasing is important in making sure it doesn't "condemn", as you put it), you make a good point re. frequency of participation - happy you got to express it. As for your objection being to the phrasing, rather than placement, my understanding is this RfC is asking if it should be mentioned in the first sentence, not how it should be written, which can be improved later. [[User:Kingsif|Kingsif]] ([[User talk:Kingsif|talk]]) 14:43, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

*'''No''', based on the RFC at {{Section link|Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography|RfC: "convicted felon" / "convicted sex offender" in the lead sentence}} - editors here should be wary of coming to a [[WP:LOCALCONSENSUS]] that contradicts the discussion there. [[User:Hatman31|Hatman31]] <small>(he/him · [[User talk:Hatman31|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hatman31|contribs]])</small> 16:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

*:That is a useful discussion to provide. Less useful is for Kingsif to respond to the majority of "no" votes since joining this conversation. – [[User:Notwally|notwally]] ([[User talk:Notwally|talk]]) 05:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

*::You have been repeatedly asked to leave me alone and should. The least useful contributions in this discussion are your attempts to hound a guy just trying to prompt discussion out of "go read something elsewhere" comments. Those are the comments I've been replying to. [[User:Kingsif|Kingsif]] ([[User talk:Kingsif|talk]]) 11:04, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

*:::{{u|Kingsif}}, you don't get to determine how talk page discussions take place on articles, and I am allowed to comment on your harassment of other editors. Considering you are the one making baseless sockpuppetry accusations above, you need to stop with your actual [[WP:PA|personal attacks]]. – [[User:Notwally|notwally]] ([[User talk:Notwally|talk]]) 18:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

*::::I have only just been made aware of this comment. Your accusations are uncivil, so I will respond. I repeatedly told you that I was just starting discussions, and while you may see it differently, I would hope you would AGF on my explanation. Replying to users asking for them to elaborate on their reasonings, which generally gives them more space to express themselves and facilitates discussion, is ''not'' harassment.<br> You allege I have made baseless accusations. '''[[User_talk:Notwally#Courtesy_SPI_notification|This]]''' is the "base" of my '' mere mention'', not accusation. I have acknowledged it wasn't very wise to mention, but it wasn't baseless - which I presume you know about since it's at your talkpage. So you're knowingly lying to paint me negatively, which is what you also did in your first reply to me, for no reason I know.<br>Let's put it simply, and put it to bed. You have had an unpleasant attitude to me responding to other users from the very first time I did it, so at that point you cannot have had any concerns about a pattern or anything, you were just rude. I ''do'' get to request that users do not constantly reply to me with slander when I'm not even engaging with them - that ''is'' harassment on your part, and is ''not'' actual article discussion. Just leave me alone, mate. [[User:Kingsif|Kingsif]] ([[User talk:Kingsif|talk]]) 00:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

*'''No''', what's wrong with keeping mention of it in the second sentence? I don't see how changing its position that slightly will make a meaningful difference in improving article quality. [[User:RFZYNSPY|<span style="color:orange;">RFZYN</span><span style="color:purple;">SPY</span>]] ^{[[User talk:RFZYNSPY|<span style="color:blue;">talk</span>]]} 19:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' — As of July 1, 2024, there are 511 words of "readable prose size", with approximately 80% of those words related to the rape conviction. Seems like to me that the only reason this article primarily exists is to disparage its subject. If that is indeed the aim of this article, then it shouldn't even exist. As for the first sentence, '''No''' it shouldn't be included there, as there is absolutely ''no way'' with the majority of the article dedicated to the conviction, our readers won't be able to understand that he is a convicted rapist, without it being said in the first sentence.[[User:Isaidnoway|<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:blue"> ''Isaidnoway'' </b>]][[User talk:Isaidnoway|<b style="font-family:Times New Roman; color:#03B54F">''(talk)''</b>]] 10:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)