Talk:Wikipedia Ethics/Case Studies/Loud and Combative

Please explain
Please gives more details to what constitutes loud and what constitutes combative and how it relates to the centralized discussion. Dzonatas 18:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * My understanding of the meaning of the word "loud" as it relates to internet communication is that this and THIS are called "loud".
 * On Wikipedia, reasoned discourse is the preferred style of communication; aimed at improving articles. "Combative" communication on Wikipedia is, in my opinion, communication that resorts to means other than presenting evidence and reasoning. For example, simply repeating the same argument over and over.
 * An argument is not improved by saying it more times or in caps or bold. People who communicate in that style give the impression of someone who believes that it is so obvious that they are right that the other person must simply not be hearing them so they say it again LOUDER. Typically, such a person is himself not giving serious thought to what the other person is saying. These cases are often best dealt with by a third party. WAS 4.250 22:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Examples of loud behavior by this individual can be found here. Salmon of Doubt 22:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Salmon of Doubt, the example you gave is not helpful, and I see you didn't make any changes to the resource page to provide any further details on what was asked. What WAS wrote above could be referenced on the resource page. However, there is still details about the central discussion. What you provided above looks like another "out" attempt than an attempt to explain or add details. Dzonatas 05:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Other than what WAS touched on earlier loud and combative, it is still pretty ambiguous what you mean, Salmon of Doubt. Do you agree with WAS about the meaning? Dzonatas 16:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * You stated "QED" in the comments of a change. Given the example above, the article is deleted, so you missed most of the conversation that took place there. You can't recount history without the article; therefore, it is not QED. Dzonatas 16:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)