| Revision as of 16:03, 31 August 2016 editStefenTower (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers181,122 edits →Note to Self:: re← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:52, 26 February 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (24 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. | Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. | ||
| }}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> ] (]) 04:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration Enforcement == | == Arbitration Enforcement == | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
| == August 2016 == | == August 2016 == | ||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for contravening Misplaced Pages's ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by first reading the ], then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. |
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''72 hours''' for contravening Misplaced Pages's ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by first reading the ], then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. ] ''(])'' 20:28, 30 August 2016 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-bioblock --> | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| remove personal attacks (accusations of racism, sexism, etc, by replacing them with {{tl|RPA}} | remove personal attacks (accusations of racism, sexism, etc, by replacing them with {{tl|RPA}} | ||
| :A description of behavior is not a personal attack. Replacing editor's concerns about your approach might get you blocked again for disruptive editing. ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 16:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC) | :A description of behavior is not a personal attack. Replacing editor's concerns about your approach might get you blocked again for disruptive editing. ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 16:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC) | ||
| ::Calling someone a racist is a ''very'' strong accusation and a defamation of character. It is a deeply cutting attack, and without any strong evidence a serious violation on so many levels. -] (]) 18:32, 31 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :::No, you provided plenty of evidence for an accusation like that. Most reasonable people will indeed conclude that. ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 18:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ::::''Superb'' execution of gaslighting and well-poisoning tactics. Now anyone who will try to make anything that even poses a semblance of siding with me will be branded as "unreasonable". Worse, ''they'' might be racist! Or maybe something even worse than that! Bravo. I'm impressed. You really must let me know which master you learned your persuasive debate tactics from so that I may also seek tutelage! -] (]) 21:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Help me! == | |||
| {{help me-helped}} | |||
| <!-- Ask your question after this line --> | |||
| Is it really appropriate to use RfC for discussion of a source's reliability? I've been ordered to set up an RfC on a BLP talkpage for a disputed source. I don't even know how to do this, especially how to categorize the RfC. Which category do I use? | |||
| <!-- On the next line is your signature; please keep it --> | |||
| -] (]) 00:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :We have a noticeboard for that. See ]. A RfC is not required. --] (]) 00:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ::I was told to do an RfC because a previous RS/N post, in the aforementioned editor's opinion, the "RSN went nowhere", and that I need to do an RfC. Do I indeed need to do an RfC? Will I be able to move an archived RS/N discussion back into the RS/N? -] (]) 01:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :::You could open a new ] or You could hold an ] either would work. --] <sup>] </sup> 04:09, 17 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 16:52, 26 February 2022
 | This user is new to Misplaced Pages. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Misplaced Pages and its intricacies. |
Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
Here are some links to pages you may find useful:
- Contributing to Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- Simplified Manual of Style
You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Misplaced Pages, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create a named account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:
- Create new pages and rename pages
- Edit semi-protected pages
- Upload images
- Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed
If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (75.140.253.89) is used to identify you instead.
I hope that you, as a new Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).
Happy editing! FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 23:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
August 2016
This is your only warning; if you violate Misplaced Pages's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Misplaced Pages page again, as you did at Shaun King (activist), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Misplaced Pages is not a platform for sharing personal opinions about people. Your personal opinion of someone's ethnicity is irrelevant and has been redacted. Continuing to post such claims may lead to sanctions. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:35, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Arbitration Enforcement
I have opened an Arbitration Enforcement request Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#75.140.253.89 here. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
August 2016
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NW (Talk) 20:28, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
@NuclearWarfare: you are confusing me with your abbreviations ]. what does "non-AE" mean? -75.140.253.89 (talk) 23:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Note to Self:
remove personal attacks (accusations of racism, sexism, etc, by replacing them with {{RPA}}
- A description of behavior is not a personal attack. Replacing editor's concerns about your approach might get you blocked again for disruptive editing. Stevie is the man! 16:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- Calling someone a racist is a very strong accusation and a defamation of character. It is a deeply cutting attack, and without any strong evidence a serious violation on so many levels. -75.140.253.89 (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- No, you provided plenty of evidence for an accusation like that. Most reasonable people will indeed conclude that. Stevie is the man! 18:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- Superb execution of gaslighting and well-poisoning tactics. Now anyone who will try to make anything that even poses a semblance of siding with me will be branded as "unreasonable". Worse, they might be racist! Or maybe something even worse than that! Bravo. I'm impressed. You really must let me know which master you learned your persuasive debate tactics from so that I may also seek tutelage! -75.140.253.89 (talk) 21:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- No, you provided plenty of evidence for an accusation like that. Most reasonable people will indeed conclude that. Stevie is the man! 18:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
- Calling someone a racist is a very strong accusation and a defamation of character. It is a deeply cutting attack, and without any strong evidence a serious violation on so many levels. -75.140.253.89 (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Help me!
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Is it really appropriate to use RfC for discussion of a source's reliability? I've been ordered to set up an RfC on a BLP talkpage for a disputed source. I don't even know how to do this, especially how to categorize the RfC. Which category do I use?
-75.140.253.89 (talk) 00:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- We have a noticeboard for that. See WP:RS/N. A RfC is not required. --Majora (talk) 00:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- I was told to do an RfC because a previous RS/N post, in the aforementioned editor's opinion, the "RSN went nowhere", and that I need to do an RfC. Do I indeed need to do an RfC? Will I be able to move an archived RS/N discussion back into the RS/N? -75.140.253.89 (talk) 01:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- You could open a new ] or You could hold an WP:RFC either would work. --Cameron11598 04:09, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- I was told to do an RfC because a previous RS/N post, in the aforementioned editor's opinion, the "RSN went nowhere", and that I need to do an RfC. Do I indeed need to do an RfC? Will I be able to move an archived RS/N discussion back into the RS/N? -75.140.253.89 (talk) 01:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)