Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:54, 25 August 2009

Duck Test

Archives

No archives yet.

Blocked for edit warring again

I have given you a block for edit warring. The edits in question are . Since your last block for edit warring was not effective in changing your habits I have chosen a longer duration this time. Chillum 23:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help. I can see no value at all in this block except as an extended punishment to the last punishment, is this the only way that the community can find to help me? I have been editing in very partisan disputed areas, Cults and Politics. So you could quite easily expect some dispute. I can just as easily find at least an equal number of situations where I have worked towards and assisted in bringing solutions to disputes, Alan greenspan lede dispute for one recently, the marxist meeting dispute on the bob ainsworth article and also articles that I have worked hard to improve, the Gordon Brown article that I worked together with another editor to keep it's good article status, the correction of numerous broken and dead links on the George Galloway article,again working together with another editor and I watch and protect all the articles that I have edited against vandalism. I have moved and renamed over 1000 pictures to commons. I have over 7000 edits now and I can claim a lot of beneficial work, this three week ban is not helpful in any way, I would request a bit more assistance and less punishment from the wikipedia. Off2riorob (talk) 08:51, 23 August 2009.(UTC)

Thanks for your comments, however it is not individual support or rejection that I an requesting here, it is admin assistance as how to stop these repeated worthless punishment blocks. I am not looking for personal opinions, I am looking for assistance to stop this repeatedly happening to me. Off2riorob (talk) 16:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Chillum perhaps would be helpful to come here and talk to me or any admin help would be appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 17:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

One remarkably effective way of avoiding edit warring blocks is to "not edit war". I know this sounds like a remarkably simplistic solution, but it really does work. Chillum 17:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

If you give me your word to refrain from future edit warring I will reduce this block to only one week. However if you go against this word in the future the block will likely be longer. Only take this offer if you really think you can refrain from edit warring. Chillum 17:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

edit conflict..Thanks for coming, please read my comments above and respect that I also have many edits that have been beneficial to the wiki, and I also have many instances of constructive editing with other editors towards succesfull concensus. I am omly asking for you to respect my positive edits and to try to find a solution that could actually be beneficial to the wikipedia. Off2riorob (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

My blocks are multi reflective, (I just made that up) basically it means..it is not so simple to say, look he has done that thing again so I can block him for longer now. Your offer is nice and I appreciate it. Off2riorob (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I am glad you appreciate my offer and find it nice. Do you agree to it? Chillum 18:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree, but the conditions are vague, and I would like to clear that up. Off2riorob (talk) 18:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

How is "do not edit war" vague? WP:Edit warring describes it very clearly. Chillum 18:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I would appreciate a time served, or a few days ban and then I would agree not to edit war for as long as possible. Or not edit the disputed article. Off2riorob (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

First you find my offer nice, then you say the criteria is vague, then you say you will not edit war "for as long as possible"? I have to say these responses all seem to be dodging the promise I am asking you to give to "not edit war". It is as though you are trying to satisfy me without actually agreeing to the conditions. It is not filling me with confidence.

We have hundreds of users who have no problem following our edit warring policies, they find it "possible" to not edit war at all indefinitely. You saying "not to edit war for as long as possible" seems to indicate that you will eventually edit war, as though it will at some point become impossible not to. Well that is not the deal I am offering, it is never impossible to not edit war. If an when you decide to give me your word that you will not edit war in the future(in plain words, without needless qualifications) I will reduce your block. I will also hold you to such a promise, so if you truly think that it may be impossible for you to not edit war then it is probably best you do not accept. Chillum 19:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

You are suggesting that if I agree specifically not to edit war again, as in, should I make three edits similar to the ones you have cited here that there will be a much more severe punishment, I wanted to know what punishment could then be expected.

I also felt that my punishment for this case of edit warring was a bit severe, there was lots of conversation still going on about the disputed situation and I had more or less reached agreement with Will Beback, who as an experienced editor, said that he agreed that the insults were not needed. I can happily accept some small punishment for this, and I will agree not to edit the Osho article for say one month and I will read the 3rr and edit war articles and attempt to adhere closer to all those guidelines. Off2riorob (talk) 10:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Having reread the 3rr and edit warring page I am prepared to make a commitment to desist from edit warrimg in the future and would like to accept your kind offer of a reduced block. Off2riorob (talk) 19:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Based on your word, I have reduced the block duration to one week. It will end 23:22, 28 August 2009. Thank you. Chillum 20:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)