Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Elaragirl

message: Over the past few weeks, I have seen Elaragirl's contributions to some discussions I've participated in or read through. I have agreed with her position in some cases and disagreed with her in others. However, even before this RfC was filed, I was struck by her statement on her talkpage that "I am very aggressive. I am very familiar with WP:NPA and I know the precise limits to which I can and cannot go...."  My question for Elaragirl (and it's a straightforward question borne out of desire to know the answer and not for any other reason) is: Why do you deem it appropriate or helpful to act very aggressively and to push up to the precise limits of permissible personal attacks? Newyorkbrad 17:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "I know the precise limits to which I can and cannot go" - hmm, that might need changing now! I just read the edit for which she was banned, and I thought - only 24 hours? It reminded me of Kelly Martin's lists of good and bad users. Carcharoth 18:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

message: Not to open up a big old can of worms, but the motivation for Coolcat's behavior might be the recent strigns of AfDs against the Star Trek articles.  Not that this makes anything right (on either side) but it might be looked into to get a full pcture of what's going on between these two users. -Husnock 04:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's been discussed in the diffs, yes. That's the main reason I'm concerned about the appropriateness of this RfC. riana_dzasta 04:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A big old can of worms 

message: since nobody else has certified this RFC, it should now be deleted, right?  Morwen - Talk 18:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ordinarily that would be the case. And yet, so many people have commented one way or the other that it might conceivably be deemed to be the equivalent of de facto certified....  Elaragirl is on Wikibreak until Monday, maybe we should see how she feels about it. Newyorkbrad 18:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly. On the other hand, majority view seems to be that this RFC was ridiculous in the first place - I can't see that those who have commented would burst into floods of noisy tears at this being chucked out. Moreschi 18:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wanna bet? I agree with NYbrad, we should wait until Elaragirl's back. riana_dzasta 18:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: That may be true, too. My point is that people might not have realized it wasn't certified, who otherwise might have signed. I am not one of them, but someone might be out there. But if this section stays here for a little while and no one certifies, then it should go, unless the subject (Elaragirl) says it should stay so she can review the comments. Newyorkbrad 18:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All right, wait till then. Seriously though, sooner or later this nonsensical RFC needs to be thrown away where no one will ever see it again, nor bother about it. Moreschi 18:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amen to that.  CC's complaints of harassment amount metaphorically to "Mom!!!  He looked at me!!!" and, sure enough, Mom unadvisedly stepped in ...  The idea that Bast could even contemplate Stewardship is appalling.  Athænara  ✉ 20:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Deleted and delisted. El_C 02:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  lack of certification 

message: I restored the project page because the edits of several users on that page have been referenced in other discussions regarding the behavior of those users.  The page is protected as it is an inactive page for reference only and should not be modified. —Doug Bell talk 12:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good move.  Unless the person who initiated the ludicrous Rfc (among other recent WP:POINT-defying antics) has an epiphany and radical change of character, this piece of living Wikipedia history will be needed to help enlighten the perplexed after he is unblocked.  Athænara  ✉ 15:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored inactive project page for read-only purposes