Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:32, 28 February 2013

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: ].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Coat of arms of Palestine

When you histmerged the PNA article with the Palestine article (per this RM) you mangled two separate histories together. There was a period where both pages existed, see this for example.

Also you changed the lead to describe the PLO emblem as a coat of arms. It isn't, all CoA's are emblems, but not all emblems are CoA's.

Also, no one had objected to my "Palestinian emblems" counter-proposel. The current title definably more closely reflects the scope then the then the old one, but the current title doesn't reflect that the article also covers the PLO emblem, and not just the CoA. After I boldly reorganized the article on that basis no one (till you) had objected or reverted, so there was consensus for that edit. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure, do I need to do anything to fix the histories? As to the content, I don't really have an opinion; my edits were mainly concerned with fixing the mangled English.  Sandstein  11:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

E4024

It may be of interest to you that E4024 was soliciting people by e-mail to edit on his behalf . Athenean (talk) 05:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Interestingly, this does not appear to be actually forbidden by the banning policy. But acting on such solicitations may be. See WP:PROXYING.  Sandstein  07:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Siege of Jülich

Hi Sandstein. When you closed the move discussion at Talk:Siege of Jülich, it looks like the Talk page got left behind in the move. Skinsmoke (talk) 15:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Done now, thanks.  Sandstein  16:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting it so promptly. Skinsmoke (talk) 16:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Konullu

You recently gave Konullu an arbitration enforcement warning here. Since then, he has restored the mess that is Justice for Khojaly. He wrote the article, of which a huge number of sources are facebook posts, youtube videos from random uploaders, petitions from non-notable groups, and even the comments section of a newspaper's website. Attempts have been made on the talk page to communicate to him what a reliable source is, but he seems to either have language issues or general competence issues. I thought since you seem more familiar with arb-related stuff, you might know what to do next (I personally try to avoid arbcom like the plague). Someguy1221 (talk) 11:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Seconded. This guy Konullu is one of the most unbridled POV-pushers I've ever come across. I filed an SPI investigation on him 12 days ago , but for whatever reason it hasn't started yet even though it's an obvious WP:DUCK. His agenda is quite blatant and he has a massive grudge against Armenians, e.g. his edits to Fraud, which were a clear violation of WP:BLPCRIME. More details available on request. Also, he's just canvassed a blocked user (under ARBAA2) to help him meat puppet . --Folantin (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but as I say in the edit notice: "Please do not ask me to take arbitration enforcement action on this talk page. Such requests will not be answered. For reasons of transparency and ease of processing, such requests should only be made at WP:AE." If you report the matter there with appropriate diffs as evidence, I'll take a look at it.  Sandstein  18:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Francesca Hogi

thank you for your closure of this AfD, but someone didn't like it (see this thread). thank you. Frietjes (talk) 00:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

SMcCandlish and appealing an unfair topic ban

I hope you don't mind me asking your advice about a topic ban appeal (and providing more information about SMcCandlish's behavior):

• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

My question : I see that WP:BASC says that "Ban appeals are not usually accepted in relation to ... limited bans (like topic or namespace bans)".

So how can I appeal the unjust and abusive topic ban described below?

• * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I started an RfC on diacritics -- the RfC was perfectly civil and rational until User:SMcCandlish came along and started hurling insults, repeatedly rewriting my comments and rewriting the proposal rather than adding comments at the bottom. Under Better use of WT:BLP time below the RfC User:In ictu oculi (IIO) calls my attempt to replace warring over diacritics with research into real world usage, and have majority-use English names included as well as diacritic versions -- rather than just diacritics -- as "trolling", in an attempt to intimidate people against participating. I can provide evidence of his canvassing (of a mob to intimidate another user) which led to me creating this RfC and his canvassing that led to this block. This "hit" by User:SMcCandlish can be shown to have been "ordered" by diacritics fanatic User:In ictu oculi, and I can show that the reason given for shutting down the RfC (immediately after having me blocked) was fabricated by IIO.

See related SMC posts here, here, ditto (2), and here (this last one contains links to the canvassing of a mob to intimidate Fyunck, particularly IIO's post to SMcCandlish who posted threats obviously directed at diacritics-neutral Fyunck.

Several people protested the total lack of due process in the topic ban.

The ruling was also ridiculous -- "indefinitely prohibited from ... converting any diacritical mark to its basic glyph on any article or other page, broadly construed, and any edit that adds an unaccented variation of a name or other word as an alternate form to one with diacritics" -- because I think I had only once "added an unaccented variation of a name or other word as an alternate form to one with diacritics" (in the lede of the Walesa article) and probably never "converted any diacritical mark to its basic glyph on any article or other page". And I can't even write an essay about the subject on my own user page?

On my talk page you can see yet another unrelated wall-of-text stream of accusations and insults from SMC here, and my reply.

It's good to see that there are still Admins who have the courage to make tough calls and stand up to loud bullies.

I'd appreciate if you have any suggestions on how can I appeal my unjust and abusive topic ban: the Japan and Vietnam-related projects are very fragile, with only a tiny number of active and knowledgeable members, and it is difficult to stand up to obsessives who canvass a lot of cronies (people not involved in these projects) in order to impose their POV. The last time diacritic-obsessive User:In ictu oculi tried to fabricate a case to force out User:Kauffner of the Vietnam project, it was discovered that one of the people canvassed was Bre'r Rabbit; Bre'r Rabbit was the one kicked out over years of repeated socking.