Revision as of 14:33, 25 August 2008 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 30d) to User talk:Nickhh/Archive 2.← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:51, 25 August 2008 edit undoElonka (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators70,958 edits Formal notification of ArbCom caseNext edit → | ||
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
Since you were involved in this dispute (and I've cited your words in connection with it), you may be interested in seeing ]. -- ] (]) 06:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC) | Since you were involved in this dispute (and I've cited your words in connection with it), you may be interested in seeing ]. -- ] (]) 06:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
==] == | |||
As a result of the above-named Arbitration case, the ] has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to Israel, Palestine, and related conflicts. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad ], described ] and below. | |||
*Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. | |||
*The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. | |||
*Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. | |||
*Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently ]), or the Committee. | |||
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions. | |||
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary. | |||
This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged ]. | |||
Nickhh, this edit summary was unacceptable. Please ensure that your future communications comply with ], thanks. --]]] 19:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:51, 25 August 2008
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Re: WP:AGF and defenestrations
Thanks for the heads-up, I'm already on it: . I'm still formulating the post, but it will appear soon.
Cheers and thanks again! pedro gonnet - talk - 01.02.2008 09:05
- Ta-da! pedro gonnet - talk - 01.02.2008 09:27
Archiving
Hi Nickhh, I wanted to offer some archiving assistance? I noticed that your talkpage is starting to get a bit long. Just FYI, anytime a page gets over about 32K or so, some browsers start having trouble with it. Your page is currently over twice that. If you'd like, I'd be happy to set up an archiving bot for you? That would automatically check your page on a regular schedule, and auto-archive any threads that had been inactive for a certain amount of time. You would still be able to access them in archive, but it would help reduce the load of the "live" page. Thanks, and let me know, --Elonka 19:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, just repeating my offer? The page is currently around 100K. I could setup an archive bot for you very rapidly if you'd like. This would not delete any threads, it would simply move the inactive ones off to a subpage, which would help keep the "live" page more manageable. You could choose whatever time cutoff you like. From a quick glance, I'd recommend a one-month cutoff, but this could be easily configured if you want something different. --Elonka 04:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, thanks - I kind of forgot about this for a while. I actually remembered only yesterday and had a quick look through how to do it myself, only to get confused and give up. Any help would be appreciated, one month would be about right I guess as I don't get that much traffic here. --Nickhh (talk) 10:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- Done. :) I seeded it with the 2007 threads, and it'll kick in sometime in the next 24 hours to archive the rest. That'll be anything that's been inactive for at least 30 days. If things get quiet, it'll only "harvest" down to a minimum of five threads, so don't worry, it won't ever blank the entire page. :) Let me know if you have any questions, --Elonka 19:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, thanks - I kind of forgot about this for a while. I actually remembered only yesterday and had a quick look through how to do it myself, only to get confused and give up. Any help would be appreciated, one month would be about right I guess as I don't get that much traffic here. --Nickhh (talk) 10:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
E-mail address
Tried to e-mail you but couldn't - could you possibly drop me a line using my email form so that I can talk to you off-wiki? -- ChrisO (talk) 08:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Chris - I may be being thick, but I can't see how to do that (I'm not very good with the more technical stuff here, even though I'm not an IT idiot at all). And actually I'm kind of against off-wiki conversations as a rule - I don't like it when it's clear that others have done it, so would feel a bit odd doing it myself. Plus I prefer to limit my involvement here to those times when I'm actually, well, here if you see what I mean (and I've been on site more often than I'd like recently anyway). Happy to have an open discussion of course though, if that would work--Nickhh (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Here's the link - http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:EmailUser/ChrisO - you just need to go there and type whatever you want in the form before hitting the "send" button. For future reference, the "email this user" link in the toolbox on the lower left hand side of the page is what you need to look for. I generally agree about open discussions, but this concerns an administrative issue - it's not appropriate for an open discussion at this stage. -- ChrisO (talk) 20:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh yes, I was looking on the main part of the page. The thing is I never registered my email here when I set up the account, and as above I'm not sure I want to and to start using it for Misplaced Pages related stuff. I'll keep an eye on things when I'm logged in here though if that helps. Cheers, Nick. --Nickhh (talk) 08:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Operation Defensive Shield
Hi Nickhh! Please do not disrupt Misplaced Pages to make a point, as you did here to Operation Defensive Shield. I trust that you are well familiar with the dispute resolution process, especiall the sentence Discuss the issue on a talk page. Never carry on a dispute on the article page itself. In other words, if an issue is raised on talk and you oppose it, make your claims on the talk page and not in the article itself. I hope you understand and this notice creates better cooperation between the two sides. Good day, Ynhockey 17:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure if you're referring to the edit itself or the edit summary - the edit was fair enough, as material had been removed without consensus and I merely restored it, as any editor has the right to do. I wasn't trying to be disruptive, I was just putting back some detail which made the box more balanced. And I did of course explain why on the talk page before making the edits (you seem to be suggesting I did not?). I do accept though that I could have phrased the second edit summary better - I was just trying to rather clumsily and pithily explain the point about balance, since in my view it read like some kind of IDF/MFA victory press release as phrased. Having said all that, as I've now also said on the talk page, I think Nudve's subsequent version is more or less the right way to go. --Nickhh (talk) 17:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Elonka RfC
Since you were involved in this dispute (and I've cited your words in connection with it), you may be interested in seeing Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Elonka. -- ChrisO (talk) 06:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles
As a result of the above-named Arbitration case, the Arbitration committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to Israel, Palestine, and related conflicts. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
- Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
- The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
- Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
- Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged here.
Nickhh, this edit summary was unacceptable. Please ensure that your future communications comply with WP:CIVIL, thanks. --Elonka 19:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)