Revision as of 16:41, 11 March 2015 editTheduinoelegy (talk | contribs)220 edits →Topic ban← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:53, 11 March 2015 edit undoHipocrite (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,615 edits →Notification: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
::Posting your complaints in the log of ] will have no effect on your situation. If you want to appeal your topic ban, you can fill out {{tl|Arbitration enforcement appeal}} and post it at ]. The appeal procedure is given in ]. Thank you, ] (]) 03:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC) | ::Posting your complaints in the log of ] will have no effect on your situation. If you want to appeal your topic ban, you can fill out {{tl|Arbitration enforcement appeal}} and post it at ]. The appeal procedure is given in ]. Thank you, ] (]) 03:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
:::No. This is bureaucratic nonsense. I edited in the utmost good-faith to bring balance to an article that is very clearly not balanced. It is pretty obvious that there is white-knighting going on, combined with massive group-think that is causing the article on Anita Sarkeensian to fail in the most basic standards of impartiality. My desire was to draw attention to this before similar behaviour explodes all over Misplaced Pages. I have no faith that an appeal would be fairly or promptly heard. This process is intended to kick things into the long-grass. I don't see how waiting 90 days to have an appeal heard is any different from waiting 90 days for the ban to be auto-lifted. You don't work for local government by any chance, do you?] (]) 14:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC) | :::No. This is bureaucratic nonsense. I edited in the utmost good-faith to bring balance to an article that is very clearly not balanced. It is pretty obvious that there is white-knighting going on, combined with massive group-think that is causing the article on Anita Sarkeensian to fail in the most basic standards of impartiality. My desire was to draw attention to this before similar behaviour explodes all over Misplaced Pages. I have no faith that an appeal would be fairly or promptly heard. This process is intended to kick things into the long-grass. I don't see how waiting 90 days to have an appeal heard is any different from waiting 90 days for the ban to be auto-lifted. You don't work for local government by any chance, do you?] (]) 14:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
== Notification == | |||
You are hereby notified of the existance of , a request for enforcement of your topic ban. ] (]) 16:53, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:53, 11 March 2015
Welcome!
Hello, Theduinoelegy, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}}
on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- Your first article
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Help pages
- Tutorial
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 have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 20:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Fish
Well, I have written only five articles on fish. I would suggest you visit a page of our Ukrainian fish expert though, @Ykvach:)--Mishae (talk) 22:02, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
November 2014
Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
KonveyorBelt 22:42, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
GG ARBCOM notice
Please carefully read this information:The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.Template:Z33 This notice is just FYI, but you are also close to WP:3RR currently on Anita Sarkeesian. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:18, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Mentioned at WP:AE
See WP:AE#Edit war at Anita Sarkeesian. You may reply there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 04:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Topic ban
Due to your disruptive behavior on Anita Sarkeesian I'm imposing upon you a 90 day ban on all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed per Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate. Dreadstar ☥ 04:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have made no disruptive edits. This is clearly censorship.Theduinoelegy (talk) 19:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- Posting your complaints in the log of WP:ARBGG will have no effect on your situation. If you want to appeal your topic ban, you can fill out {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}} and post it at WP:AE. The appeal procedure is given in WP:AC/DS#Appeals and modifications. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- No. This is bureaucratic nonsense. I edited in the utmost good-faith to bring balance to an article that is very clearly not balanced. It is pretty obvious that there is white-knighting going on, combined with massive group-think that is causing the article on Anita Sarkeensian to fail in the most basic standards of impartiality. My desire was to draw attention to this before similar behaviour explodes all over Misplaced Pages. I have no faith that an appeal would be fairly or promptly heard. This process is intended to kick things into the long-grass. I don't see how waiting 90 days to have an appeal heard is any different from waiting 90 days for the ban to be auto-lifted. You don't work for local government by any chance, do you?Theduinoelegy (talk) 14:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- Posting your complaints in the log of WP:ARBGG will have no effect on your situation. If you want to appeal your topic ban, you can fill out {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}} and post it at WP:AE. The appeal procedure is given in WP:AC/DS#Appeals and modifications. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Notification
You are hereby notified of the existance of , a request for enforcement of your topic ban. Hipocrite (talk) 16:53, 11 March 2015 (UTC)