Revision as of 13:26, 7 September 2007 view sourceEl Sandifer (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,527 edits →Deutschie← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:43, 7 September 2007 view source Irpen (talk | contribs)32,604 edits →Nicely writtenNext edit → | ||
Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
I just looked at the "how to present a case" guide for the arbcom, and saw that you'd added the "Mooning the jury" section. Very nicely done - you hit the style of the rest of it so well that, for a moment, I couldn't figure out why I'd forgotten the assault joke after writing it. Eventually I realized it was because I didn't write that section, but still. Well done. :) ] 13:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | I just looked at the "how to present a case" guide for the arbcom, and saw that you'd added the "Mooning the jury" section. Very nicely done - you hit the style of the rest of it so well that, for a moment, I couldn't figure out why I'd forgotten the assault joke after writing it. Eventually I realized it was because I didn't write that section, but still. Well done. :) ] 13:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
==Latvia== | |||
Despite (not because) you protected the article at "my" version, so to speak (with the tag), I thank you for doing so. To certify my good faith, I am asking you to protect it on a random version (with or without the tag.) | |||
Now, I request that you continue to monitor the discussion at the talk page, provide some feedback and, finally, monitor the various boards where one side's calls for actions continue to pop up. Lately, two Misplaced Pages-space boards have been used as a workaround to the WP:DR by a side who habitually resorts to such tricks to "win" content disputes. Since, as a clerk and an admin, you monitor them anyway, please consider making a note at the article's talk whenever someone goes block-shopping again. I hate monitoring those noticeboards and religiously avoid clicking on the contribution logs of disruptive editors (to minimize stress.) | |||
I am not here to sway you in any way. Just please maintain your involvement in the issue. | |||
TIA, --] 17:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:43, 7 September 2007
Atabek
Thatcher, if you don't know which side Atabek is on, then I think you are in no position to say he was less disruptive than some other users. Atabek has been more disruptive than most other users including Tajik. He is by far the one single user who's been able to create so much conflict with Iranian and Armenian users, as of right now he probably beats AdilBaguirov in this. Also I'm very disappointed that you choose to ignore the report about him in the Arbitrations enforcement notice board. Not a single word was added about the incident, while you removed the anon IP's comment, who knew so much about Tajik. I was actually waiting for him to tell us what Tajik ate for breakfast. And while were talking about the anon IP and his comments. I'd like to clarify that none of the current active Armenian users is a teenager. --VartanM 01:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- How do you know that? Not all Armenian users declare their age on their user pages. And I see that some users seem to have started a campaign against Atabek, but no real proof any violation has been provided. --Grandmaster 05:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- The same way I know that you're not a teenager, by communicating with them. Atabeks violations were reported to ArbCom noticeboard. Welcome back by the way. VartanM 17:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- I haven't made lists of "He's pro-Armenian" or "He's pro-Azeri" or "He's a Turkish nationalist." When (or if) I respond to a complaint, I look at the behavior cited, and try to make a fair response. Thatcher131 11:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thatcher, your neutral view is appreciated, but your statement that his less disruptive then some others is totally wrong. My I remind you that he barely survived a 1yr block in the A-A1 and the A-A2 was initially opened because of his disruptive behavior. VartanM 17:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello Thatcher, in my absense for last 2 days, I and my edits came under an attack of editors VartanM, Pocopocopocopoco, Fedayee, TigranTheGreat, Hetoum I on various pages, just checking the history of one of them, Khojaly Massacre page is sufficient to see what's going on . In addition, User:Chaser placed me under civility ban without any prior warning (i.e. I was absent between his warning and ban). Also, Hajji Piruz is back reverting my edits on bunch of other pages. May I know, why I am being banned for 4 days, while all these editors involved in ArbCom in their clearly coordinated effort are not less disruptive, continue warring in an unrestricted manner, clearly along ethnic and national lines. Moreover, in prior case, User:VartanM was kindly warned, while I am being placed immediately under ban, without any warning. Atabek 19:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- You don't have to be warned. Any administrator may ban you from articles or even the broad topic for disruption; you are well aware of this part of the arbitration enforcement case. It seems reasonable to me. Complaints about other users can be made on the various noticeboards. Due to the extremely broad nature of this dispute and the nature of volunteer admins, perfectly even-handed enforcement is a goal that is unlikely to be perfectly achieved. Thatcher131 23:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, this may need clarification, which I also asked User:Chaser for . The wording for second remedy here clearly says that the remedies including civility supervision and supervised editing shall be applied after placing a warning. User:Chaser placed the warning first, and then afterwards enacted a ban, when I never signed in between the warning and the ban. In similar case of User:Hetoum I, only the warning was placed without a ban. Thanks. Atabek 07:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- In remedy 1, all users from the first case were placed on supervised editing (probation) and may be banned from articles for disruption. Remedy 2, requiring notice, applies to new editors not previously informed of the dispute. Thatcher131 15:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Where do I stand now?
Thatcher, what's the deal exactly on my editing permissions? I have held off on creating anything new in regards to the other Nox Arcana CDs? I started a partial article before all the stuff with Skinny McGee happened, but I only stuck it in a sandbox with the hopes that I could one day use it, or that someone else might. See what I started here and let me know if I am allowed to post it as a stub or something. I also started some of the articles for MS, just summaries, but I don't even want to touch any of that at this point. I'm still waiting for someone to look into Skinny McGee's false report against me, but I have a feeling nobody cares enough to bother. Anyway, let me know if I will be blocked for editing or what. I've been sticking to talk pages but it's not exactly productive. Thanks. Ebonyskye 00:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- See Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Midnight_Syndicate#Ban_for_disruption_2. "No present or past employee or associate of Midnight Syndicate, Nox Arcana, or Monolith Graphics, under any username or anonymous IP, may edit Midnight Syndicate or associated articles. It is acceptable to make suggestions on the talk page." Thatcher131 00:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
But I am not a past or present employee or associate. That is what I have been trying to tell you. You even admitted that my IP was not a match and if you would only LOOK before my edits you would see that I did not start the mentions of Vargo... that stuff was already in the articles. I either dated the entries or added to them a bit. That was all. Your ONLY reason is based on editing I did not initially do. Ebonyskye 08:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- You edit in the same or similar manner as GuardianZ; you and SKinny McGee can not seem to stop arguing about Midnight Syndicate and Joseph Vargo so you are both banned from those and related articles. You may contact any other admin or the arbitration commitee. Thatcher131 14:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I have had NO arguements with Skinny McGee. He never even said anything to me about any of the edits. And again, with the exception of ONE sentence that I re-wrote completely, all the other mentions of Vargo were already on the board. I am not the person who added his name to the articles. Why are you being so stubborn? Do you want me to post links to all the previous edits here so you can see them? I already posted them at WP:AN, which you know already. Did you bother to look at them? Can I not post the article I started on the Winter's Knight album? That does not mention anything about Midnight Syndicate at all, plus only the MS page was banned in that decision. At that time there was nothing on NA, and I sure as heck did not start the NA pages. Are you like some friend of McGee? Is that why I am being singled out like this and why you are fighting so bad to keep people from editing the NA pages? Ebonyskye 09:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Caucasus Germans
Hello. Can you place a semi-protection tag on the Caucasus Germans article? Some anon has been removing the word Azeri from there since May 2007 claiming the term was pejorative: , , , , , and . All my attempts to reason with this person have been in vain; they keep switching IP-addresses, hence my messages on their talk page probably remain unread. Parishan 06:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not a frequent enough problem to warrant protection. Thatcher131 14:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Here's more, just in the past two days: and . Parishan 23:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I put a 14 day semi on it. In the future you can post to WP:RFPP where they are a better judge of this sort of thing. Thatcher131 00:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
DHeyward Trolling
User:DHeyward is following me around and (IMO) trying to provoke me. He showed up on an article I am active on for months Western_Hemisphere_Institute_for_Security_Cooperation that he had never edited, made a 'troll edit' and then erased my message to him advicing him not to troll the article. The facts that he won't communicate about this issue which I posted to him in good faith and his troll edit to the article shows that he lacks good faith intentions on this article. There are millions of articles on Wiki. Could you ask him to leave me alone and find another article? IMO his only object is to haunt me and get me to bite. I have now decided to avoid certain articles like Larry Craig so I wont be provoked. I am going to stay away from Crockspots favorite articles as much as I can. And I have since my block! And now I go to an article that I have been editing for months and Dheyward Wikistalks me there and haunts me. Please get him to stop and leave me be on that article. Thanks. •smedleyΔbutler• 08:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- Is this still an ongoing concern? For what it's worth, I am generally suspicious of "Controversy" sections in articles, especially when the controvsery section is as long as the main section (not to mention linking to two expanded articles). It should be possible to describe the history of a thing without having to label a section of the article as a "Controversy" which obviously sets a certain tone. Thatcher131 02:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hetoum I
FYI, User:Hetoum's first edit after the expiration of his 24hr block . Atabek 04:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Blocked again for 1RR violation. Thatcher131
Collection of material proposed language
There is a new subthread having proposed language for Misplaced Pages:User page. You previously commented on this matter and your comments at Collection of material proposed language would be appreciated. Hopefully, we can bring this to a close with the next day or two. -- Jreferee 18:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Have done. Thatcher131 02:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Socks
- take a look, both User:Drosophilawhodoestnotfly and User:Hu1lee admitted to being socks, first one of User:Fadix and the other of banned sock User:Azizbekov. I reported this to Dmcdevit, though he seems to be away. So just to note, both users continue editing as of now. Atabek 23:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- They're blocked now. Thatcher131 02:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello. An administrator forgot to long Atabeks block here: (or is it being logged somewhere else now?).Hajji Piruz 04:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hajji they're now being logged in the AA2 page and it wasn't a block it was a topic ban, thats why he reverted himself.
- Thatcher whats your opinion on User:Flavius_Belisarius because his the self admitted sockpuppet of User:Shuppiluliuma , and is yet to be banned, apparently two other administrators know about it and yet he is still here. VartanM 04:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh ok, thanks for the information.Hajji Piruz 04:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Have you discussed this with User:Future Perfect at Sunrise? Thatcher131 06:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I left a note on his talkpage, he never responded back. Also he knew that he was being disruptive but he did nothing again. I personally believe that if Flavious gets blocked right now, hes gonna create a sock and comeback, since he got away with it. He's been using that account for almost 6 months now. VartanM 06:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- He hasn't edited for two weeks. If he comes back and is disruptive to articles relating to Armenia-Azerbaijan-Iran-Turkey you can ask at WP:AE that he be noticed in to the remedies there. Assuming Future Perfect is right in his assessment, being "generally a competent editor but with a temper" describes a lot of people here. Thatcher131 11:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Movses Kaghankatvatsi
Hi. I would appreciate if you could review the sources that I provided here: They are being constantly deleted from the article by certain users, which I beleive is not justified. Grandmaster 11:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- While you're at it, can you please give your two cents on David Bek --VartanM 16:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Shushi Massacres
This page was created by a banned sock User:Hu1lee of User:Azizbekov, who vandalized over a dozen Wiki pages, including several user pages, yesterday before his ban. This sock-created POV/OR page qualifies for the speedy deletion criteria. While User:Grandmaster is trying to insert the relevant tag on the page, User:Andranikpasha is reverting and removing the tag without sufficient reasons. Also, he is claiming that he created the page , , which was actually created by User:Hu1lee. Could you take a look, please? Thanks. Atabek 17:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- There are exceptions to every rule, and an article with over 30 references is not going to be deleted because it was started by a banned user. It is also true that there used to be two articles, Shushi Pogroms and Shushi Massacres, which were merged. Because of the history merge and page move, all edits are attributed to the resulting article and it is impossible to tell who contributed to which original article before the merge. Assuming this is a real and important historical event, please work together to present it according to Misplaced Pages policies. Thatcher131 18:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Deutschie
Hi. Could you please check contribs of Deutschie (talk · contribs)? This is a very suspicious account, that made his very first contribution by reverting quite an obscure article Shushi Massacres, previously edited by another sock of banned user Azizbekov. I suspect that it could be another sock. Grandmaster 05:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Another 2: Urmenihte (talk · contribs) and Lobefan24 (talk · contribs). Looks like coordinated action. I suspect that it is banned user Azizbekov. Grandmaster 05:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- All 3 accounts turned out to be socks of banned User:Artaxiad and were blocked. The issue is resolved, sorry for disturbance. Grandmaster 10:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- And two more User:Armenian2 and User:Benzinsoyqirm. Could you please, update the ArbCom page block log, if necessary. Thanks. Atabek 12:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like another one: Gazifikator (talk · contribs). Grandmaster 13:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Nicely written
I just looked at the "how to present a case" guide for the arbcom, and saw that you'd added the "Mooning the jury" section. Very nicely done - you hit the style of the rest of it so well that, for a moment, I couldn't figure out why I'd forgotten the assault joke after writing it. Eventually I realized it was because I didn't write that section, but still. Well done. :) Phil Sandifer 13:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Latvia
Despite (not because) you protected the article at "my" version, so to speak (with the tag), I thank you for doing so. To certify my good faith, I am asking you to protect it on a random version (with or without the tag.)
Now, I request that you continue to monitor the discussion at the talk page, provide some feedback and, finally, monitor the various boards where one side's calls for actions continue to pop up. Lately, two Misplaced Pages-space boards have been used as a workaround to the WP:DR by a side who habitually resorts to such tricks to "win" content disputes. Since, as a clerk and an admin, you monitor them anyway, please consider making a note at the article's talk whenever someone goes block-shopping again. I hate monitoring those noticeboards and religiously avoid clicking on the contribution logs of disruptive editors (to minimize stress.)
I am not here to sway you in any way. Just please maintain your involvement in the issue.