Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:45, 26 July 2009

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Welcome!

Hello, Nug, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  User:Advocatus diaboli

1RR limit

Under the terms of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren I am placing you on a one revert per week limitation for all articles covered by that Arbitration case (Eastern Europe, broadly defined). You are prohibited from making more than one reversion per week per article, not including obvious vandalism. A reversion is any edit that substantially restores the article to prior content, whether or not it is a reversion in the purely technical sense. All reversions must be discussed on the article talk page. Violations will result in escalating blocks. You may request to have the 1RR limit reviewed or lifted after 6 months. This limit is imposed following evidence of prolonged edit warring, the Arbitration Enforcement complaint made here, and as a result of the recent disgraceful edit warring at at Nashi (youth movement) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) over the inclusion of Category:Anti-fascist organizations. While no editor violated the 3RR rule (4 reverts in 24 hours) there were at least 23 reversion of the category between June 11 and June 21, without a single comment by anyone on the talk page. The list of editors and reversions makes a prima facia case for tag-team editing; whether it was organized or spontaneous is irrelevant, and it is not required that I prove anything one way or the other. It's time to edit cooperatively and use the talk pages to discuss disputes.

Thatcher 03:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Vacated Thatcher 20:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Soviet war crimes.

Dear Martintg, could you please comments on my recent post in the pogroms section. I would like to implement proposed changes but I would prefer to know your opinion before that.--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Kuril Islands dispute

Please do not move this article again without very clear consensus to do so. Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 08:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

blocked

I have blocked you from editing indefinitely owing to a breach of WP:OUTING, see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Attempted_outing. Moreover, the background of an editor has no sway on content, only reliable sources can be cited. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow! That's a very heavy handed block! Theresa Knott | token threats 19:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I've unblocked you, your behaviour seems to be supported. Happy editing. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

No it isn't. Martin if someone asks you to respect their privacy and not publish their nationality then don't do it. It's a matter of courtesy. Everyone has the right to edit anonymously if they wish without details about themselves being announced by other users. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You have not heard of Misplaced Pages:PLAGUE? Nationalism is a big problem on Misplaced Pages, since when is mentioning someone's nationality now an issue of WP:OUTING, particularly when it is common knowledge in this particular instance and the problem of nationalist editors has been discussed for years? --Martintg (talk) 21:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

And you made it worse by bringing up someone's nationality. Either way, don't post undisclosed personal information about other editors. Stick to sources. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree with Gwen here. I fought to get you unblocked this time. Do it again and I'll happily block you myself. Consider this your one and only warning. Theresa Knott | token threats 21:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

How was Offliner's nationality undisclosed? Offliner's compatriot User:HistoricWarrior007 mentioned his nationality this on Talk:2008 South Ossetia war: "There is very little Russian perspective here. Certainly FeelSunny, Ingy and Offliner, but three people, all of whom are much more liberal then most Russians, cannot bring in the Russian perspective. I started editing this article because I wanted to help out. I've seen it mentioned elsewhere and am sure I can find other diffs. This perma-ban is totally over the top and really hampers efforts to deal with Misplaced Pages:PLAGUE. --Martintg (talk) 21:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You weren't perma-banned and besides, I unblocked you. Comment on content and sources, not on other editors. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

No don't go looking for diffs! He didn't disclose it himself and he doesn't want it repeated. So don't. End of story. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:05, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

If people who mentioned my nationality with reference to content were permanently blocked (not that I make it a secret), including that my perspective is tainted by a "majority" of my nationality being "happy for Nazi guns" to kill Jews, probably 20 editors would have been permanently banned by now for what they've said to/about me. Meanwhile editors who have outed individual identities are still around. Oh well, on the bright side, the next time one of those come up at least I'll know where to go for action. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  23:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Nationality is hardly "private information", unless one is a one-person nation. While discussing editors is discouraged, mentioning somebody's nationality is usually ok. This strange storm in a teacup is puzzling. As an admin I oppose the block and support the unblock. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Kuril islands

I am glad you are back. The dispute about Kuril islands reminds me a song by a Russian group (some humor):

"Nash president ne piot in ne kurit,

Luchshe by pil i kuril!

Mozet ot etogo bylo by lucgshe

Ziteljam Yuznyx Kuril."

Translation:

Our president does not drink and he does not smoke.

It would be better if he drink and smoke a lot .

May be that would make the inhabitants of Kuril islands much happier..

Just take it easy. Biophys (talk) 04:20, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

outing by any other name

Although there was some good faith disagreement among admins as to how this might be handled, having looked into this even further, I believe blocking you was already wholly supported by WP:DIGWUREN.

This is your last warning. You must be very heedful of en.Misplaced Pages policy whilst editing these topics. Never, ever comment on another editor, even as to their nationality. Some may disagree in good faith as to whether it's a kind of outing, but either way, talking about an editor's nationality in a nationalistic content dispute is a kind of personal attack which is meant to undermine another editor. COI is allowed here if an editor carefully puts policy first, but nationality alone is never a conflict of interest but rather, a nationalistic outlook may be a conflict of interest if it is put first. So again, don't comment on other editors, comment only on content and sources. If you stray again, you'll most likely be blocked from editing. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't really see what's the heck here. I remember Martin being referred to as a 'Tazmanian Estophile', I didn't see anyone getting blocked for 'outing' then neither did I look forward to such a thing. All Martin did was referring to Offliner's background to point out that the user seemed to reflect too much of a pro-Russian POV in his edits. after all, Offfliner is by no means an innocent victim here. As already pointed out by User:Will Beback, Offliner himself has been promoting pro-Russian viewpoints, having used an edit summary like this just a few days ago. Offliner's claim that his opponent was somehow going to 'out' him is just impudent. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 13:34, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

That editors can think warning one editor somehow means another editor has been editing within policy, is but a flaw in outlook. My warning to Martintg has aught to do with Offliner's behaviour. How many times must we say, comment only on content and sources, not on other editors? Gwen Gale (talk) 13:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Gwen, on reflection I accept the manner in which I attempted to air the issue of Offliner's nationalistic outlook on the article talkpage after Offliner proceeded to strip all non-Russian viewpoints from the article lead was somewhat brusque and could be construed as a personal attack, and will certainly be more careful in my choice of words in future.

I'm not alone believing this was not a case of outing, and making unproven allegations of misconduct, in this case outing, is also a form of personal attack designed to undermine the other editor, and Offliner has been warned in the past not to file such vexatious claims. Offliner is a veteran of filing complaints on WP:AE, and if this comes under WP:DIGWUREN (and Kuril Islands dispute seems to fall outside of the scope of that case being Eastern Europe), he should know that board would have been the more appropriate place to lodge that complaint, but perhaps he wouldn't have achieved the same result. This whole incident illustrates the dangers of taking complaints at face value and taking action before adequately investigating the issues or allowing discussion of the incident to mature. --Martintg (talk) 23:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

• Temporary Wikipedian userpages