| Revision as of 00:39, 7 April 2013 editDominus Vobisdu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,436 edits →Misunderstanding on timings← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 01:14, 15 August 2020 edit undoJayBeeEll (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers28,146 editsm Reverted 1 edit by Keninkelak (talk) to last revision by MediaWiki message delivery (TW)Tag: Undo | ||
| (668 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{retired}} | |||
| Archive ],],],], ] ] | |||
| == |
== Mea Culpa == | ||
| I wanted to offer you an honest apology for my behavior on the Anita Sarkeesian talk page. While I stand by my general stance, I was far snarkier than necessary (I blame it on editing while traveling, but that's no excuse). I confess I am kind of amazed there isn't more reliable critical reaction (positive or negative) to Ms. Sarkeesian and her project. I tend to think it's because the field has been so completely occupied by proxy battles that there's no room left for anything else, but that's for another day. I obviously believe your proposed text was unhelpful, but I wanted you to know that when and if you (or I, for that matter) find a reliable reaction--positive or negative--which adds to the article, I will absolutely support its inclusion. Thanks, and again, sorry for the snark. ] (]) 16:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Nominated: ] - essentially, it's a BLP of someone barely notable with no high-quality sources about the subject, and should be deleted forthwith as a BLP hazard - ] (]) 17:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::No worries. ] (]) 09:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==WP:Reliability== | |||
| == Misunderstanding on timings == | |||
| Is the Secondary Sources Reliability WikiProject still active? I remember you as being one of the founding members along with the (it appears also-retired) History2007 three years ago when I retired from WP for a few years. I don't really remember anyone else, nor am familiar with the new features of WP, so, apologies for bringing you out of retirement to ask. ] <sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 20:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| You may want to ask Delicious carbuncle yourself, but my impression is that what you said is wrong. ArbCom (or least those arbitrators paying attention at the time, I was one of those but didn't look at the matter as closely as I should have done) were independently aware of this back in 2009, but the matter wasn't followed up then (it was, I believe, passed to the functionaries list but nothing much happened). I believe Delicious carbuncle had concerns in 2010, but I don't think he e-mailed ArbCom about it at that point (you may want to check this with him). I think a week or so ago was the first time he e-mailed ArbCom about this, so he hadn't been waiting three years for us to do something, more like waiting three years to follow up his concerns, then e-mailing us, then waiting four days, then, after not hearing from us, well you know what happened after that. I just hope there are not other concerns that he has known about for years and not followed up yet. ] (]) 21:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :Carcharoth is more right about this than they are wrong. I had not personally contacted ArbCom about this particular user before my blog post was published. As Carcharoth states, ArbCom was aware of concerns about this user in 2009 (there is a diff from 2007 in which the editor in question confirms on-wiki what I wrote off-wiki, so there may have been discussion also before 2009). You will have to ask them if other users contacted them in relation to this user between 2009 and now, although I get the impression that they may not be able to tell you since they don't seem to track these types of cases. I hope Carcharoth or another Arb will correct me about that if I am wrong. My blog post went up on Wikipediocracy on 25 March. If no one from ArbCom was keeping an eye on that blog following the debacle created by their outing of Russavia, they have only themselves to blame. And read my exchange with Coren from December near the bottom of ]. My email to them was the follow-up. This isn't a difficult case and the diff from 2007 leaves no room for doubt. Carcharoth is an admin and could have made the block themselves, if they were so inclined. ] (]) 22:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::There should be no presumption that any arbitrators follow the blogs on Wikipediocracy (or even the discussion forums), I cannot stress that enough. Some arbitrators (me included) read parts of it. Some are members. Some won't touch it with a bargepole. This presumption that we have the time or inclination to follow matters on Wikipediocracy is a presumption that is mystifying - I briefly scan threads that look interesting because some of the posters there say some intelligent things (others don't). My initial thoughts on the matter that you e-mailed us about were that if nothing had been done since 2007, then 2009, then 2010, things could wait for a few days until the other arbs were more active again (and I should have said that to you at the time). There was no emergency here. It was your decision entirely to force matters by your actions. Anyway, we should probably limit the discussion here (it is IRWolfie's talk page after all) and return to your talk page. ] (]) 22:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :::I'm not trying to entice anyone to Wikipediocracy. I'm not involved in the running of the site and I don't benefit from any increase in hits. I find it difficult to believe that no one from ArbCom is keeping an eye on the blog. ] (]) 03:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| :Ah, I misread your response, I thought you were saying DC had raised the point. I would clarify it but the thread is closed, cheers, ] (]) 14:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Thanks == | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks. I've been worked to death recently. I'm mentoring a bunch of high school students, and have four right now that I'm getting ready for their final exams here in Poland, and going through the application and testing process so that they can study in the US. On top of that, I have a big bunch of grant proposals to write and translate, and a film to make. A short educational film, but it takes about 15 minutes of hard work to end up with 15 seconds of usable film, and that's just filming, not counting the writing and rehearsals. I miss editing with you, and hope to find more time for it soon. Take care! ] (]) 00:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692013717 --> | |||
| == Religious explanations of gravity listed at ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''Religious explanations of gravity'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 00:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == ]: Voting now open! == | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, Second Quantization. Voting in the ''']''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review ] and submit your choices on ''']'''. ] (]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/17&oldid=750571901 --> | |||
Latest revision as of 01:14, 15 August 2020
Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.Mea Culpa
I wanted to offer you an honest apology for my behavior on the Anita Sarkeesian talk page. While I stand by my general stance, I was far snarkier than necessary (I blame it on editing while traveling, but that's no excuse). I confess I am kind of amazed there isn't more reliable critical reaction (positive or negative) to Ms. Sarkeesian and her project. I tend to think it's because the field has been so completely occupied by proxy battles that there's no room left for anything else, but that's for another day. I obviously believe your proposed text was unhelpful, but I wanted you to know that when and if you (or I, for that matter) find a reliable reaction--positive or negative--which adds to the article, I will absolutely support its inclusion. Thanks, and again, sorry for the snark. Dumuzid (talk) 16:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- No worries. Second Quantization (talk) 09:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
WP:Reliability
Is the Secondary Sources Reliability WikiProject still active? I remember you as being one of the founding members along with the (it appears also-retired) History2007 three years ago when I retired from WP for a few years. I don't really remember anyone else, nor am familiar with the new features of WP, so, apologies for bringing you out of retirement to ask. St John Chrysostom τω 20:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Religious explanations of gravity listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Religious explanations of gravity. Since you had some involvement with the Religious explanations of gravity redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 00:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Second Quantization. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)