Misplaced Pages

User talk:Asdfg12345: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:07, 23 November 2015 editMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,133,055 edits ArbCom elections are now open!: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 04:52, 14 October 2021 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)Tag: AWBNext edit →
Line 4: Line 4:


WP:AE is still in progress and several people have spoken in your defense ] (]) 16:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC) WP:AE is still in progress and several people have spoken in your defense ] (]) 16:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
:thx, had meant to respond and explain. I wasn't trying to get out of sanctions (I didn't know it worked like that), just found the process unappealing. --<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 17:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC) :thx, had meant to respond and explain. I wasn't trying to get out of sanctions (I didn't know it worked like that), just found the process unappealing. --]] 17:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
::Retiring for a period to wait out and avoid sanctions is a very reasonable approach. I think it came out wrong I did not mean imply any sinister motivation. ] (]) 17:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC) ::Retiring for a period to wait out and avoid sanctions is a very reasonable approach. I think it came out wrong I did not mean imply any sinister motivation. ] (]) 17:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)



Revision as of 04:52, 14 October 2021

Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.

Havent been banned yet.

WP:AE is still in progress and several people have spoken in your defense The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 16:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

thx, had meant to respond and explain. I wasn't trying to get out of sanctions (I didn't know it worked like that), just found the process unappealing. --Asdfg12345 17:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Retiring for a period to wait out and avoid sanctions is a very reasonable approach. I think it came out wrong I did not mean imply any sinister motivation. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement topic ban: Falun Gong

In application and enforcement of WP:AFLG#Motions, per this AE thread, you are indefinitely topic-banned (as per WP:TBAN) from Falun Gong. I will consider lifting this sanction on appeal after at least a year of unproblematic editing.  Sandstein  23:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident

This is a note to let the main editors of Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 3, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/April 3, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident took place in Tiananmen Square in central Beijing on 23 January 2001. The incident is disputed: the official Chinese press agency, Xinhua News Agency, stated that five members of Falun Gong, a banned spiritual movement, set themselves on fire to protest the unfair treatment of Falun Gong by the Chinese government. The Falun Dafa Information Center stated the incident was a hoax staged by the Chinese government to turn public opinion against the group and to justify the torture and imprisonment of its practitioners. The incident received international news coverage, and video footage was broadcast later in the People's Republic of China by China Central Television. A wide variety of opinions and interpretations of what may have happened emerged: the event may have been set up by the government, it may have been an authentic protest, or the self-immolators "new or unschooled" practitioners, among others. The campaign of state propaganda that followed the event eroded public sympathy for Falun Gong, and the government began sanctioning "systematic use of violence" against the group. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello Asdfg12345. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang 23:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Clarification motion

A case (Falun Gong) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 22:39, 27 October 2014 (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) 16:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)