Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:14, 24 August 2013

Archives

/Archive N,

mail SonofSetanta

Thanks for the message - I didn't look at the times when I edited and didn't realise we were talking about a matter of minutes, so perhaps a little too quick off the mark! Good work on the rapid addition of sources and improvement, cheers. Lactical (talk) 17:10, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Wolfe Tone Societies

Hello again. I think you probably know by now that while we welcome and appreciate your contributions, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. Your new article Wolfe Tone Societies article appears to contain material copied from http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/crights/nicra/nicra781.htm and from the book Armed Struggle: The History of the IRA by Richard English (Macmillan, 2003, ISBN 978-0-330-49388-8), and therefore to constitute a violation of Misplaced Pages's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Misplaced Pages, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Wolfe Tone Societies and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Wolfe Tone Societies, in your email. See Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Wolfe Tone Societies with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Wolfe Tone Societies. See Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Misplaced Pages article layout. For more information on Misplaced Pages's policies, see Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Wolfe Tone Societies saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages. Happy editing! Psychonaut (talk) 18:19, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

Best to refrain from making anymore statements. You've given your defence and editors have responded, and further comments will only get more responses to those comments resulting in prolongated discussions that people will skim over when making their decision. Wait until Calill or whoever comes along and makes a definite decision on the matter, and if it goes against you, you always have the right to appeal. Mabuska 15:00, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. Will do. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

The Troubles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bloody Sunday

Wolfe Tone Societies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Irish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Drumcree conflict may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• others aren’t--> marches take place in the town. Throughout the 20th century, the police force (](RUC) was also almost wholly Protestant.<ref name="Mulholland"/>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion tags

I am entitled as an editor, never mind being an administrator, to remove CSD tags that are inappropriate. The 'nonsense' tag applies only to things like 'actor formal house judicially enterprise wigwam soup' or 'uyytryt yutytyttyrrrr'. If the text is coherent (or obviously foreign), it does not fall under the 'nonsense' criterion. This article is quite coherent. I am suggesting that you remove the tag yourself, and if you have a problem with the article, that you raise it on the talk page. I also suggest that you read the criteria for speedy deletion. Peridon (talk) 13:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Special Patrol Group and the Glenanne gang

Where on The Troubles talk page is the consensus you claim that any reference to this connection should be removed? Mo ainm~Talk 15:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

It's not removed, just cut down. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Could you point me to where it is mentioned then in the article please Mo ainm~Talk 15:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

AE request

A request to enforce an arbitration decision concerning you will shortly be posted at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Here we go again.SonofSetanta (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Please only edit the section with your statement.  Sandstein  16:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Shoot-to-kill policy in Northern Ireland AfD

Hi. With this edit you added a link to an AfD nomination for the article Shoot-to-kill policy in Northern Ireland to today's log, but you did not create the actual nomination page. Instead, you added a proposed deletion tag to the article. The proposed deletion process is a little different from the deletion discussion process. Proposed deletion is a way to suggest uncontroversial deletion by adding a tag to a page. If the tag is removed, then you can no longer use the proposed deletion process. I recommend that you please read the guide to deletion to learn more about how the deletion processes work before nominating the page again for deletion. The deletion policy also lists valid reasons for deletion. Best, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Posting at the Arbitration board

Just some advice about that arbitration enforcement discussion: each of us is given a section, called "statement by so-and-so", and that is the only place we can say anything. To reply to someone else, begin your comment with "@whoever" but put it in your own space. Awkward, I know, but that's how they do it. --MelanieN (talk) 16:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Oops, I see that you replied to Sandstein in his space. Go move it to your own space, before someone else has to move it and gets annoyed. --MelanieN (talk) 16:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I've been having trouble with that too - I displaced one of your posts and tried to get it back where I thought it belonged. I've never been in the Arbitration area before so far as I can remember. Confusing. Anyway, I hope we've got you straightened out about the different ways for deletion - yes, they can be confusing too if you haven't worked in them as long as I have. Do ask Melanie or me if there are things you're still not sure on. (She's not an admin, but I'm not the only one that thinks she ought to be...). Peridon (talk) 16:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

A couple of items, just to continue the learning process here: 1) Posting walls of text at the Arbitration site is not advisable. See the instruction at the top of the page, Requests may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs (not counting required information), except by permission of a reviewing administrator. That may apply only to the requesting party, but in any case, the wordier and more repetitious your posts are, the less likely it is that they will read and consider everything you say. See WP:TLDR. Bottom line: time to stop posting; you have made your points. 2) There is no such thing as an "AfD admin". Administrators are administrators (also called sysops). They can do any of the administrative chores here, including deleting and restoring articles, protecting pages, banning or blocking users, and rendering decisions at a page like the arbitration area where you are currently engaged. Only administrators can participate in the "decision" area there; both admins and ordinary editors like me can post in the "statement by..." section. Of the people who are engaged in the current discussion, Peridon, Sandstein, Cailil and Seraphimblade are administrators. --MelanieN (talk) 16:36, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ulster Special Constabulary

As you're aware, the wording of that section of the article is being discussed on the talkpage. Other editors clearly disagree with the changes you proposed, but you went ahead and made those changes anyway. You should've tried to reach an agreement before doing anything. Your changes removed reliably sourced content and, in my opinion, introduced bias. The paragraf you added read like anti-Irish nationalist propaganda. It was mostly about the UDR rather than the USC, it presented opinions as fact, and it didn't give an opposing view. ~Asarlaí 15:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Recent events

SoS I told you that you should avoid controversial subjects and just concentrate on army stuff which is what you have great knowledge on. Whilst the shoot-to-kill article is army related, it is also controversial and you went ahead and tried to get it speedy deleted which to be honest I don't understand. It is highly notable subject that deserves its own entry, or entry in a very related article. Just because it reads like a republican propaganda sheet doesn't qualify it for deletion - just heavy modification - through discussion and sources.

You have also been warned of 1RR before and it clearly states: "All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). When in doubt, assume it is related." - shoot-too-kill is abundantly easily construed as being Troubles related and you should of assumed that it was so. Many articles that should be tagged as such haven't been when they should be but you should also know from your previous warning.

I have given you a lot of support recently, but you have ignored my advice. You should have asked me what would of been the best way to go about the article rather than just go gung-ho at it. It definitely would not have been to speedily delete it, even if you didn't understand the process, which to be honest is confusing at times.

This situation is of your own making. I did say always discuss issues!

Mabuska 20:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

And when you did try to discuss at Talk:Ulster_Special_Constabulary#Composition, that is not the best way to do so in order to get support for your actions. Though just to add I have never seen Lukeno94 on an Ireland related page before so I wouldn't assume they are a friend of Mo ainm's. I have only encountered them at AN/I so I must assume they were tracking you like Pyschonaut. Mabuska 20:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I am very sorry to have caused damage to your reputation Mabuska. My actions at the Shoot to Kill article were genuine however. Everything seemed to happen so fast that I got caught off guard and reacted in a knee jerk way. I accept I was wrong but I don't think the actions of several other people helped and I am suspicious that my difficulty was exploited. For the moment anyway I think I need to withdraw, certainly from the USC and shoot to kill article, and maybe concentrate on a purely military agenda for the next wee while. SonofSetanta (talk) 12:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Reply to your e-mail

In reply to your e-mail, the answer to your question of "Am I wrong to be paranoid?" is very likely yes. Not everything that is done with respect to content edited by you is aimed at you; you should try to assume good faith and that others are more likely just doing what they think is best for Misplaced Pages, rather than trying to attack you.  Sandstein  06:56, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement sanction: WP:TROUBLES

The following sanction now applies to you (in accordance with the procedure described at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions):

You are indefinitely topic-banned from everything related to The Troubles.

You have been sanctioned for the reason(s) set down in this Arbitration Enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles#Final decision. This sanction has been recorded on the log of sanctions for that decision. If the sanction includes a topic ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions#Appeal. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal. If you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you.  Sandstein  07:04, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Appeal

{{subst:Arbitration enforcement appeal

| Appealing user

 = SonofSetanta

| User imposing the sanction

 = Sandstein

| Sanction being appealed

 = Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions
      Topic ban from everything related to The Troubles, imposed at
      w/index.php?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&oldid=569961730#SonofSetanta, logged at
      Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles#2013

| Reason for the appeal

 = The overwhelming consensus at the arbitration page was that a mistake had been made by me, something which I maintained throughout.  Two of the three admins who had been involved confirmed this as their opinion: User:MelanieN and User:Peridon.  My belief at that time was that I was undoing vandalism and that was over-riding [[WP:1RR}.   I was getting to grips with it and had moved to the article talk page until the unexplained intervention of (User:Mo ainm) whom I have experienced unpleasantness from before and who can be seen to clamour for a ban against me throughout the proceedings. He made two swift reverts on a 1RR page without explanation. I note also that Someone not using his real name, who is in fact User:One Night In Hackney, and who has been the subject of many AE cases regarding The Toubles.  I hope that any involved sysops will regard whatever these two say as WP:WEASEL and in particular the pursuance of a grudge under WP:BATTLE, particularly as both have gone to some lengths to hide their previous editing history as per WP:CLEANSTART (both have been topic banned from Troubles articles in the last year). I therefore put it to you that, although I made a genuine error on a new procedure, the mistake was compounded by the intervention of someone who was determined to take advantage of the situation, WP:WIKIHOUNDING.

Much has been made of my inability to cope with new tasks on the wiki. I accept that as correct. Once I learn something however I don't repeat mistakes as is evidenced in my approach to the problems I had with image copyright in the days leading up to 5th July 2013. I would still say the approach of copyright patrollers was less than sympathetic and I was very much thrust into a learning curve I wasn't ready for. However, I applied myself to it and there are no such issues remaining today. This includes going back over two previous identities and making sure that all copyright issues were dealt with, including the many frivolous ones.

My previous identities have come in for scrutiny. As of 7th August 2013, as per the advice of a sysops, all three accounts were clearly linked after I made it absolutely clear that I was the owner of those accounts.

Notwithstanding the above, which I believe clearly exonerates me from any deliberate disruption, I made a clear statement on the AE case here that I was withdrawing voluntarily and indefinitely from all articles concerned with the Troubles. I am firmly of the belief that my current personal disposition makes me unsuitable for editing articles where partisan views create an atmosphere in which collegiate discussion and the pursuance of academic accuracy take second place to establishing a political WP:POV. I had requested that the article at Ulster Defence Regiment and all articles relating to it with Ulster Defence Regiment or UDR in their title be exempt from this withdrawal as to me the continued editing of these articles falls squarely into the sphere of Military history and my success as an editor on all articles concerning the UDR is without doubt, having raised the main article to B Class, narrowly missing an A Class recently and now up for WP:GA. I repeat my offer of voluntary restrictions now, suggesting that it, as a self imposed sanction, gives me more scope to prove over a long period of time that it is the interests of Misplaced Pages I have at heart and not a personal agenda.

I request that this topic ban be overturned and instead I will enter into an indefinite voluntary withdrawal agreement from Troubles articles. Should I ever feel able to return to these contentious areas I agree to do so only under the supervision of my mentor User:Mabuska and with the permission of a sysop.

Whatever the outcome of this appeal I request again that all articles concerning military history, and in particular articles concerning the Ulster Defence Regiment, be exempt from any voluntary or imposed restrictions so that I might give my best to Misplaced Pages.

}}