Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:15, 4 September 2010

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.

Topic ban violation

Hi Sandstein. I'd like to bring to your attention the topic ban violation by user:Nishidani The user made at least three comments on AN/I thread concerning I/P conflict.

; . Here is the link to his ban. Broccoli (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, please make any enforcement requests at WP:AE, and not here, as per the edit notice of this page. Thanks,  Sandstein  06:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I have never filed AE before. Could you help me please? Broccoli (talk) 18:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The instructions are in Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, which you see when editing the page.  Sandstein  18:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Topic ban question (another one, sorry)

On the basis of comments made by Chumchum7 (calling me a troll four times in a single post) and observations made by EdJohnston and yourself regarding notification of Digwuren discretionary sanctions, I placed the standard notification and an explanation on Chumchum7's userpage. I took care not to mention anything I'm topic banned from. However, I've since noticed that the standard warning template contains a reference to the area which I am topic banned from. Should I modify the standard warning template to avoid making any reference to it? Varsovian (talk) 13:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, this text contains a clear reference to Eastern Europe and the EE-related DIGWUREN case, so you should revert this message at once if you do not want to be blocked for violating your topic ban.  Sandstein  13:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I've reverted the message as you directed. From what you say it is impossible for me to notify Chumchum7 of the discretionary sanctions, regardless of whether they may or may not apply. Could you perhaps be so kind as to suggest the best way in which deal with Chumchum7's breaches of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA? Or should I just accept that Chumchum7 can call me whatever kind of troll he wants to as often as he wants to? Varsovian (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The normal procedures per WP:DR apply.  Sandstein  14:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

So WP:ANI? I would have thought that that is a step further than notifying Chumchum7 of discretionary sanctions and am not sure that I want to take that additional step. One other thing if I may: does the topic ban mean that I am unable to even use a template which includes a reference to the topic of my topic ban? I hope you don't mind all these questions, I just prefer to ask rather than put myself in a situation where something I say could be twisted and used against me. Varsovian (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

You're banned from Eastern Europe. This means you may not warn others against misconduct in the Eastern Europe topic area, whether by template or otherwise. If the dispute between you and the other user relates to Eastern Europe, think hard about whether you want to pursue any further action. Although topic bans normally allow actions strictly necessary for dispute resolution, it will be difficult for you to discuss the other user's conduct without violating your topic ban. You may be best advised just to let the matter drop, since you will now no longer be editing in that area and the dispute may therefore become moot. Of course, if the other user misbehaves towards you in a non-EE context, you are free to use all normal dispute resolution procedures.  Sandstein  14:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed advice, it makes things much clearer. In this particular situation, the dispute regards comments made by Chumchum7 on another user's talk page, not on any page in any way related to the area I am topic banned from, so (with hindsight) probably using that template was not appropriate. On the other hand that fact that it isn't related to the topic banned area means that I can discuss this conduct. Thank you again. Varsovian (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

What's the status of AE request?

Hi Sandstein, I wonder what is the current status of this AE request ? Is it officially closed, end of story? To tell the truth, I have never seen a case to be closed by one of the partisans, subject to the request, rather than by administrators. I did not start the case and do not ask it to be reopen. I just would like to know because it involves me. Thank you.Biophys (talk) 20:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

That closure appears highly questionable to me as well. But I'm not currently active at AE, so I suggest you ask one of the currently active administrators whether that request requires administrator action.  Sandstein  20:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

No, I would not ask anyone because this is not my responsibility.Biophys (talk) 13:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I closed the case – no administrator bit was needed. I have given my reason here and here. Now, If anyone even hinted, that the action was inappropriate or unwanted, I would gladly have reopened the case and made appropriate nose at some other venue frequented by admins to call for prompt action. Biophys came close to hinting on my talk page, but not quite. I understood Biophys wanted to be left alone. I now find him here badmouthing me. He got whacked and he very nearly got blocked for braking his topic ban. He should really think more carefully about what he is asking for. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 11:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Be that as it may, Petri Krohn, you should leave the closing of AE threads to administrators, especially if you are or were involved in any related disputes.  Sandstein  11:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I admit to being bold. I too would have loved to see the admin in action. Unfortunately none were to be had. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 11:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

AE requests do not necessarily require closure. They are automatically archived if they are no longer edited. If you believe a thread does require closure, please ask at WP:ANI for an admin to close it.  Sandstein  11:56, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

You are right, I should have notified WP:ANI of my decision to close the case. (Then again, maybe I should not have.) -- Petri Krohn (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for clearing up the unblock request. I'm not used to handling them, so thanks for fixing my mistake. NativeForeigner /_Contribs 01:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Timmy Polo's Talk Page

When User:Timmy Polo said the word in his last unblock request the word F***, I censored the word because I know that bad words are not allowed at wikipedia. Is that right? I was trying to keep wikipedia safe. Honorboy123 (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You mean this? No, that was not right. Misplaced Pages is not censored.  Sandstein  05:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Could use another admin on sources issue

See: Talk:History of South Africa#new sub-section: extra-parliamentary activities

Somewhat problematic user Communicat (talk · contribs) has been credibly accused of having misrepresented a source rather badly. I am waiting on a detailed response, but I wanted to see if you could review the situation and comment there if you have some time.

If you want to wait a while to let him reply and explain his reasoning, that's fine. This is early and he really hasn't had time yet to respond appropriately (just some grumpy throwaways, but not substantiatively as of yet). Nothing needs rushing here.

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:34, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for weighing in on this subject. I appreciate as many eyes on the subject as possible. The the links I provided on that talk page show that Communicat's alleged source, "Fascism Today: A world survey" clearly does not even mention Hendrik van den Bergh, so it cannot source that he was head of this organization. Likewise, my link shows that "Fascism Today: A world survey" says that Broederbond was created before the Ossewa Brandwag and that the latter organization evolved into the National Party, not the Broederbond. When Comminicat is trying to use "Fascism Today: A world survey" to support things that are not mentioned or are flatly in "Fascism Today: A world survey" that is not a content dispute, especially when other users have documented Communicat doing the same thing with other sources in other articles. Edward321 (talk) 14:43, 4 September 2010 (UTC)