| Revision as of 02:38, 25 February 2007 editGordonWatts (talk | contribs)4,767 editsm →I have initiated [] action against the other editors involved in the recent ban action against me.: typo← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:16, 25 February 2007 edit undoJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,070 edits →I have initiated <s>[]</s> [] action against the other editors involved in the recent ban action against me.: Hah!Next edit → | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| :I believe you mean ] not ]. I'm guessing you don't mean your starting a Request for adminship against the editors that wish to ban you. --] 02:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | :I believe you mean ] not ]. I'm guessing you don't mean your starting a Request for adminship against the editors that wish to ban you. --] 02:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::Yes; Thank you for caTCHING MY TYPO. --] 02:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | ::Yes; Thank you for caTCHING MY TYPO. --] 02:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| * Please be aware that the case may well not go the way you want it to. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 12:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:16, 25 February 2007
Terri Schiavo
Per Misplaced Pages:Community noticeboard#Community ban request on User:GordonWatts:
- You may not edit articles related to Terri Schiavo
- You may not link or suggest links to your own sites
- Your participation in Schiavo articles is restricted to making a very small number of brief comments to Talk pages, of the order of one per day. Note that this does not mean one thread, edited numerous times, it means one edit.
Failure to abide by these restrictions will lead either to an outright ban, or to ArbCom (who will almost certainly apply precisely the same restrictions, but with more force). Guy (Help!) 15:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- "* You may not link or suggest links to your own sites" I have just seen this message, so I am not prepared to respond to all points, but this point seems to be in violation of current Misplaced Pages policy: WP:COI clearly says that "If you feel it necessary to make changes to Misplaced Pages articles despite a real or perceived conflict of interest, we strongly encourage you to submit content for community review on the article's talk page or file a Request for Comment to the wider community, and to let one or more trusted community members judge whether the material belongs in Misplaced Pages," not that I suggest links to my web papers very often. Also, Misplaced Pages:Spam#Canvassing point 6 states that "If your product is truly relevant to an article, others will agree -- try the talk page. We usually recommend that editors be bold in adding directly to articles. But if the above advice makes you concerned that others will regard your contribution as spam, you can find out without taking that risk: Describe your work on the article's talk page, asking other editors if it is relevant." This one requirement alone is a violation of the Misplaced Pages policy I just quoted. I am interested to see what my the violations are. As I recall, I was accused of linking to my site, promoting my site, and excessive talk, but last I heard, talk is permitted, even if it is a minority viewpoint. To restrict a person's speech based on content seems a violation of Misplaced Pages policy, but I have not seen the latest posts.--GordonWatts 00:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Free advice - worth every cent.
Hi Gordon, I saw this comment of yours: "I have proof here that others are lying when they claim...". Now, I don't know if people are right or wrong, but I'm sure they aren't lying. At worst, they are mistaken. Can I trouble you to choose your words more carefully in the future? Thanks, Ben Aveling 21:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe they are lying; I call a spade a spade. However, I did make a point to be polite, did I not, in the process of calling a lie?
- Just this morning, I learned my cousin, Catherine, just died. She was only about 53, and i have been very preocupied.--GordonWatts 00:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear about your cousin. Was it expected? No need to reply if you have places you should be - family comes first at times like this, you probably don't want to hear my take on anything to do with wikipedia. Regards, Ben Aveling 00:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- She had been in very poor health for a long time, so my cousin, Kitty's death was not unexpected, but these things are always grave. Thank you for your sympathies, Ben.--GordonWatts 00:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- That can make it easier, not that these things are ever easy. All the best, Ben Aveling 02:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- She had been in very poor health for a long time, so my cousin, Kitty's death was not unexpected, but these things are always grave. Thank you for your sympathies, Ben.--GordonWatts 00:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear about your cousin. Was it expected? No need to reply if you have places you should be - family comes first at times like this, you probably don't want to hear my take on anything to do with wikipedia. Regards, Ben Aveling 00:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I have initiated WP:RfA WP:RFAR action against the other editors involved in the recent ban action against me.
I have initiated WP:RfA WP:RFAR action against the other editors involved in the recent ban action against me. Observe:
Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Current_requests
--GordonWatts 02:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I believe you mean WP:RFAR not WP:RFA. I'm guessing you don't mean your starting a Request for adminship against the editors that wish to ban you. --Bobblehead 02:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes; Thank you for caTCHING MY TYPO. --GordonWatts 02:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please be aware that the case may well not go the way you want it to. Guy (Help!) 12:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)