Misplaced Pages

User talk:Elahrairah: 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 13:56, 22 October 2013 editMarshalN20 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers15,094 edits Ban policy and consequences← Previous edit Revision as of 14:27, 22 October 2013 edit undoDarkness Shines (talk | contribs)31,762 edits Ban policy and consequencesNext edit →
Line 62: Line 62:
:If you have time, please do look further into Keysanger's actions at the article. He seems to have a major ] in the subject. I honestly ''would like'' to respond to his content questions (I have the book and information he claims is "nonexistent"), but have refrained myself from doing so per the TBAN. :If you have time, please do look further into Keysanger's actions at the article. He seems to have a major ] in the subject. I honestly ''would like'' to respond to his content questions (I have the book and information he claims is "nonexistent"), but have refrained myself from doing so per the TBAN.
:Best regards.--] | ] 13:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC) :Best regards.--] | ] 13:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
::{{reply|MarshalN20}} EMail me the full quotes please. ] (]) 14:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:27, 22 October 2013

Administrators - if you need to contact me urgently, consider using the hotline instead.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15



This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

RfA

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)
Arbitration Committee proceedings Case requests

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

Open cases
Case name Links Evidence due Prop. Dec. due
Palestine-Israel articles 5 (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) 21 Dec 2024 11 Jan 2025
Recently closed cases (Past cases)

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

Clarification and Amendment requests

Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.

Arbitrator motions
Motion name Date posted
Arbitrator workflow motions 1 December 2024

Talkback

Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at Beeswaxcandle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at 155.55.60.110's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at Talk:Xavier Zubiri.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tb

Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at MichaelQSchmidt's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Happy Holidays!


Vacation is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

SPI - Regarding XMattingly's blocked account

Hi, Basalisk. Thanks for your attention into this. There is no need to remind me to keep discussion civil though, since I never made an inflammatory comment. As I said before, this was the only comment that I made on the Bradley Manning talk page. The others that were attributed to me are completely false.. It looks like Richard BB fully intended to throw the book at me based on an assumption, which you agreed with..

It looks like the user Numazİs was ultimately attributed to someone named JarlaxleArtemis, who is apparently a big thorn in Misplaced Pages's side. Given your comment to Toddy1 (on the "SPI" subject) on your talk page that Numazİs was a sock of someone, I'm not getting the impression that concrete evidence was present before you decided to block my account. One way or the other, having followed the talk page history, sock puppet investigation, etc. it does appear that my account was hacked. And I'm not happy about having to deal with a wrong judgement against my account, and especially having my input about the state of the Bradley Manning article silenced, either.

I would appreciate more information on the following:

  1. Can I get verification that my account was hacked, and how can I prevent this in the future?
  2. Since my only wrongdoing was not more than making a page edit and reverting someone else's revert, can I get the "Blocked for sockpuppetry" subject expunged from my talk page?

Anyway, from all appearances I'll have to assume that one or more people were abusing Misplaced Pages in the midst the controversy, and I got caught in the crossfire. Thanks again for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.97.91 (talk) 00:16, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


Hello, Elahrairah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Ban policy and consequences

Hi Basalisk,

I would appreciate your opinion as supervisor in the issue Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Problems_at_War_of_the_Pacific. He absolutly can't help doing it: . --Best regards, KS (wat?) 09:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Basalisk, the user "Keysanger" who has messaged you above was vandalizing the article on the War of the Pacific (see ), which is why I made a notification of the issue at AN/I. As you can see in the article's history (see ), his actions were reverted by User:Cloudaoc and User:Darkness Shines (the former being the one who contacted me about the problem, and the latter responding to Keysanger's "strange" actions in the talk page).
In the article's talk page, my only actions were to recommend Keysanger to "provide evidence for his claims" and also notified that his vandalism of the article (massive deletion of source material) was further unjustified given that he even deleted an author, Jorge Basadre, who he claimed was reliable (for Keysanger's deletion of the Basadre source, see ).
I believe my actions at no point broke my topic ban and were justified under the "obvious vandalism clause" at WP:TBAN.
If you have time, please do look further into Keysanger's actions at the article. He seems to have a major WP:COI in the subject. I honestly would like to respond to his content questions (I have the book and information he claims is "nonexistent"), but have refrained myself from doing so per the TBAN.
Best regards.--MarshalN20 | 13:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
@MarshalN20: EMail me the full quotes please. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)