Revision as of 22:53, 26 May 2010 editLev Reitblat (talk | contribs)68 edits →Notification of arbitration sanctions← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:04, 28 May 2010 edit undoChrisO~enwiki (talk | contribs)43,032 edits Violation of Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons policyNext edit → | ||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged ]. | This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged ]. | ||
*In relation to the above, you are informed that the ] article is under a blanket 1RR restriction and violations of this restriction will result in escalating blocks and/or topic/page bans. Thank you for your cooperation. ] | ] 21:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC) | *In relation to the above, you are informed that the ] article is under a blanket 1RR restriction and violations of this restriction will result in escalating blocks and/or topic/page bans. Thank you for your cooperation. ] | ] 21:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
==Violation of ] policy== | |||
Misplaced Pages's ] policy requires that if content has been removed because of good-faith BLP objections, consensus must be obtained before it is restored. A majority of editors opposes the restoration of the material you just restored to ]. There is clearly no consensus for its inclusion. Please desist or you will be referred to ] for action. -- ] (]) 00:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:04, 28 May 2010
Welcome
|
Notification of arbitration sanctions
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
- Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
- The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
- Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
- Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged here. -- ChrisO (talk)
- And as such, since ChrisO is not an administrator, this notice is not effective and I have removed it from the log. Breein1007 (talk) 20:33, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- I checked the log (before your removing) and found out that ChrisO send this notification notice only to those editors who was against his opinion about Goldstone. Is it possible to punish him for such kind of illegal action?
- I don't know. Maybe it's impersonating an admin or something. I'm not sure what you can do about it. Maybe try asking another uninvolved admin. It's certainly hard to work on editing articles with users who do things like that, though. Breein1007 (talk) 20:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- I checked the log (before your removing) and found out that ChrisO send this notification notice only to those editors who was against his opinion about Goldstone. Is it possible to punish him for such kind of illegal action?
Don't make an ass of yourself. The notice is effective. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 20:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- If you an administrator (and not an ass) how can you explain that only part of the editors of Golstone talk got the notice? I hope you add all of them --LReit (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hello Lev. I am an administrator, and probably also something of an ass (you'll have to be the judge of that). You'll have to ask ChrisO why specific editors were provided the notice.
- Part of the answer, I think, may be that other editors were notified in the past. You can see a list of editors and the dates they were notified here. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 21:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- That's correct. I checked the list, found that the three editors I notified were not listed, and notified them. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- This is wrong! Check the list of editors notified by HJ Mitchell several hours after your notification and you see that most of them were not previously notified--LReit (talk) 22:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- That's correct. I checked the list, found that the three editors I notified were not listed, and notified them. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Notification: General sanctions and 1RR restriction on Richard Goldstone
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
- Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
- The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
- Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
- Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged here.
- In relation to the above, you are informed that the Richard Goldstone article is under a blanket 1RR restriction and violations of this restriction will result in escalating blocks and/or topic/page bans. Thank you for your cooperation. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Violation of Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons policy
Misplaced Pages's Biographies of living persons policy requires that if content has been removed because of good-faith BLP objections, consensus must be obtained before it is restored. A majority of editors opposes the restoration of the material you just restored to Richard Goldstone. There is clearly no consensus for its inclusion. Please desist or you will be referred to arbitration enforcement for action. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)