Revision as of 20:59, 28 May 2010 editDeacon of Pndapetzim (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators39,745 edits →WP:AE: fix← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:02, 28 May 2010 edit undoSandstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators188,206 edits →WP:AE: rNext edit → | ||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
Sandstein, I see you have responded to the AE thread. You seem not to have noted my comments however, or ... this thread should be closed as the opener is banned by ArbCom motion from launching such processes. This is a quite a straightforward matter I think. There is no amendment allowing for this. Cheers, ] (<small>]</small>) 20:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC) | Sandstein, I see you have responded to the AE thread. You seem not to have noted my comments however, or ... this thread should be closed as the opener is banned by ArbCom motion from launching such processes. This is a quite a straightforward matter I think. There is no amendment allowing for this. Cheers, ] (<small>]</small>) 20:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
:No, as far as I know topic bans do not include necessary dispute resolution, as in this case, since this concerns the conduct of Dr. Dan with respect to Piotrus. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 21:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:02, 28 May 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.
More of the same...
On this -- do I go back to AN/I to get it dealt with? Perhaps you now count as "involved" and can't address it yourself... thanks, Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:25, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- What is the context? Any applicable previous decisions? I don't recall. Sandstein 20:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Apologies -- context here, you blocked him for exactly the kind of behavior he is now bringing to the Rekers page again. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK, blocked for 48 h this time. Sandstein 20:39, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Apologies -- context here, you blocked him for exactly the kind of behavior he is now bringing to the Rekers page again. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted your deletion of a user's comments, and have restored that deletion now because somebody else explained the context. It would be helpful if you gave some rationale when doing things like this - because without knowing you are an admin, that you have blocked the user, and why the comments were deleted, it looks the same as vandalism of a users comments on a talk page. Thanks. Mish (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Your e-mail address
Hi Sandstein. I have been sent an e-mail that relates to an administrative action you recently undertook. Could you send me an e-mail so as to provide me with your address (to allow me to forward the message to you)? I'll start a thread relating to the message on your talk page shortly, for transparency's sake—though I'm not sure the claims have any merit. But it's probably best if you take a look at it before I do that. It's nothing serious, I don't think; just a claim by an account blocked by you for sockpuppetry (on clear evidence) that he has been wronged. Thanks, AGK 20:42, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK, done. Sandstein 21:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks; new message sent your way. AGK 22:20, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Brandmeister, Grandmaster, John Vandenberg
Hi, I left a comment on it, but apparently too late it was archived. While the report for the most was needless, I think Brandmeister behavior leaves a lot to be desired. Ionidasz (talk) 05:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Then that can be made subject to a separate and better-explained request. As made, the request was not actionable. Sandstein 06:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'll leave that to other editors, will take a brake from this area of Misplaced Pages. Ionidasz (talk) 06:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Brandmeister, again, see here. Ionidasz (talk) 19:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
RE:Mehr Lal Soni Zia Fatehabadi.
- Sir, today I have made the needed request for the review of deletion of my captioned article.Tarun marwaha (talk) 11:40, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
scope of topic ban
Your topic ban specifically covers articles in the A/I topic area. May I work within my userspace on such topics or not? nableezy - 05:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Technically, I suppose, draft articles in your user space are still articles even though they are not in the main namespace. However, I do not have a problem with it as long as the draft articles do not generate any dispute. Sandstein 05:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Change of article title for James Norman, MD
Hello! You were the closing administrator for the article James Norman, MD. The consensus was keep. There was also some debate in that AfD discussion about changing the name of the article - since Misplaced Pages does not usually use professional titles like "MD", "PhD", or "Doctor" in article titles.
Several of us have continued that discussion at Talk:James Norman, MD and we seem to have reached consensus about how to change things. However, some of the changes may require administrator tools. Would you be willing to look at that page, and if you agree with the changes, would you go ahead and carry them out?
Thank you! --MelanieN (talk) 22:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, done. Sandstein 22:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
The Recent AE Request
Although in the past I have usually ignored these almost juvenile attempts to find ways to censure me, and prevent me from stating my frank opinion concerning many things, I believe it will be in everyone's interest that I respond at this case. I'm asking for your consideration for a brief amount of time to formulate a proper response. A family graduation and the current holiday has not given me a chance to get to it yet. A day or two is all that I will need. Thank you. Dr. Dan (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- You are free when and whether to respond, but administrators are also free to take a decision about the request at any time once you've had a reasonable time in which you could have responded, so it's really up to you. Sandstein 19:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
WP:AE
Sandstein, I see you have responded to the AE thread. You seem not to have noted my comments however, or my conversation with AGK ... this thread should be closed as the opener is banned by ArbCom motion from launching such processes. This is a quite a straightforward matter I think. There is no amendment allowing for this. Cheers, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- No, as far as I know topic bans do not include necessary dispute resolution, as in this case, since this concerns the conduct of Dr. Dan with respect to Piotrus. Sandstein 21:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)