| Revision as of 15:44, 3 March 2016 editLiz (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators768,510 edits Posting a query← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:29, 3 March 2016 edit undoAskahrc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,228 edits →Review of old SPINext edit → | ||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
| :Given the time which has elapsed I'd be willing to remove the restriction on you alerting others to the discretionary sanctions if you can tell me how you'll avoid encountering issues with that, as what occurred last time. Regarding the one account restriction, I'm not as convinced that that should be removed, but I'm willing to be convinced. <b>]</b> (] • ] • ]) 06:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | :Given the time which has elapsed I'd be willing to remove the restriction on you alerting others to the discretionary sanctions if you can tell me how you'll avoid encountering issues with that, as what occurred last time. Regarding the one account restriction, I'm not as convinced that that should be removed, but I'm willing to be convinced. <b>]</b> (] • ] • ]) 06:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | ||
| ::Thank you for your response. I honestly have no problem voluntarily abstaining from any new accounts or bothering others with discretionary notices. The only account I have any desire to use is this one, or occasionally my IP if I forget to sign in (which I clarify afterward). The only times I was ever accused of that behavior was in Vzaak's SPI's, and as I mentioned, his "evidence" of my socking ended up getting solidly debunked. I may have a strong voice (and could be accused of being a ]), but in every circumstance I've always tried to uphold WP policies and guidelines to the best of my ability, have publicly announced all CoI's, tried to maintain ], etc. | |||
| ::My main concern is to be exonerated of the socking charge and be able to remove that notice from my Talk Page. In 7 years of editing Vzaak was the only person who ever accused me of socking (though others have called me that since the notice went up on my Talk); I've never had any accusations of acting illicitly before or since. People disagree with my positions, sure, but no one else has charged me with deliberate violations of WP policy. | |||
| ::To sum up, socking has never been in my pattern of behavior, my initial SPI conviction was ''not'' supported by a Checkuser, and the following SPI (using the same type of evidence) confirmed ''with Checkuser'' that I had no possible connection to the supposed sock, and that Vzaak's other charges were false as well. If there are lingering concerns about disruption, I'll voluntarily submit to random Checkusers, restrain from using other accounts, notifications, or whatever else seems reasonable. I just want to stop being vilified for something I didn't do. ] (]) 17:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == ACC CU Backlog == | == ACC CU Backlog == | ||
Revision as of 17:29, 3 March 2016
 | Callanecc is busy and may not respond swiftly to queries. |  |
Editor DuckZz
Earlier you have put the ban of edit all articles about the war in Syria for this editor because he is broke rules of edit here But later you remove this ban but this guy still violate the rules of edit. He is again remove the towns and villages from map and do other editings without any sources on based suggestions and on based of him personal desires and his actions are causing great harm to the map.hereherehere He ignored all comments in which I ask him stop make such edits but he again provide me only his suggestions and reflections, and nothing more. According to the rules of edit here:
1-A source, reliable for that specific edit, should be provided.
a) A well-known source that has a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) for all edits.
b) A well-known source that does not have a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) only for edits that are unfavorable to the side it prefers (favorable to the side it opposes).
c) A source that is not well-known (or that has proven inaccurate for all edits) cannot be used (is deemed unreliable) for any edit. This includes all maps (see item 2- next).
2-Copying from maps is strictly prohibited. Maps from mainstream media are approximate and therefore unreliable for any edit. Maps from amateur sources are below the standards of Misplaced Pages for any edit. They violate WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR.
WP:RS: “Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources.” Source: Misplaced Pages:Verifiability#Self-published_sources
WP:CIRCULAR: “Do not use websites that mirror Misplaced Pages content or publications that rely on material from Misplaced Pages as sources.”
3-WP:POV pushing and intentional misinterpretation of sources will not be tolerated. If you are not sure about what the source is saying (or its reliability), post it on the talk page first so that it would be discussed.
We must edit only based relaible sources which must distinctly provide all our edits but his many times ignored this rules. So I ask you to convince him not to do so or to restore previously established ban otherwise its illegal actions will continue to cause damage to this article.Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map Sûriyeya (talk) 07:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
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.
Destiny Leo (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Review of old SPI
It's been 2 years since I was warned about sockpuppeting, and I was hoping to have the issue reviewed. I didn't do so at the time because I didn't want to appear disrespectful of admin authority, but I have been consistently frustrated by the false charge and the stigma it has given me on WP. The Appeals page recommends I speak to the enforcing admin first, so I thought I'd run my reasoning by you. 2 years ago Vzaak(they since left WP) and I had several disagreeable interactions while editing, and they began stating I should be removed from WP.
- Shortly afterward they filed a charge against me in SPI, with a huge list of circumstantial "clues" they had compiled indicating my guilt, mostly based on the editing IP and my alma mater both being in Long Beach, CA. Never having faced an SPI, I don't think I responded to their many accusations very well, and I was warned for sockpuppeting.
- Vzaak then initiated an AE against me, which was set aside.
- Vzaak then initiated another SPI against me, using an almost identical huge list of clues to prove that I was again sockpuppeting (and issuing death threats) from Long Beach, CA... except I was hundreds of miles away before, during, and after the supposed socking activity, as confirmed by admin Checkusers. When the admins dug a little deeper, they also found that the other accusations Vzaak had leveled against me (that I was "suppressing edits" in some kind of warring behavior) at the time were completely false.
As a side note, two of the editors who at various times supported Vzaak's claims against me (Barney and 76) were later sanctioned and/or blocked for inappropriate personal attacks.
Would you please consider reviewing the warning I have on record? To this day it is difficult to resolve any policy discussion without someone referring to me as a "sock" and disregarding any points I was making. The initial SPI originated from an editor who had a clear hostility toward me, charged me with various infractions over and over, and was eventually proven to have been citing inaccurate information. Please let me know what you think. Thank you! The Cap'n (talk) 01:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- Given the time which has elapsed I'd be willing to remove the restriction on you alerting others to the discretionary sanctions if you can tell me how you'll avoid encountering issues with that, as what occurred last time. Regarding the one account restriction, I'm not as convinced that that should be removed, but I'm willing to be convinced. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response. I honestly have no problem voluntarily abstaining from any new accounts or bothering others with discretionary notices. The only account I have any desire to use is this one, or occasionally my IP if I forget to sign in (which I clarify afterward). The only times I was ever accused of that behavior was in Vzaak's SPI's, and as I mentioned, his "evidence" of my socking ended up getting solidly debunked. I may have a strong voice (and could be accused of being a WP:OGRE), but in every circumstance I've always tried to uphold WP policies and guidelines to the best of my ability, have publicly announced all CoI's, tried to maintain WP:CIVIL, etc.
- My main concern is to be exonerated of the socking charge and be able to remove that notice from my Talk Page. In 7 years of editing Vzaak was the only person who ever accused me of socking (though others have called me that since the notice went up on my Talk); I've never had any accusations of acting illicitly before or since. People disagree with my positions, sure, but no one else has charged me with deliberate violations of WP policy.
- To sum up, socking has never been in my pattern of behavior, my initial SPI conviction was not supported by a Checkuser, and the following SPI (using the same type of evidence) confirmed with Checkuser that I had no possible connection to the supposed sock, and that Vzaak's other charges were false as well. If there are lingering concerns about disruption, I'll voluntarily submit to random Checkusers, restrain from using other accounts, notifications, or whatever else seems reasonable. I just want to stop being vilified for something I didn't do. The Cap'n (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
ACC CU Backlog
Hello old friend, there is currently an ACC CU backlog of 15+ requests at the time of writing this. Any assistance would be appreciated! -- Cheers, Riley 02:00, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Riley, nice to see you again! I've cleared out the backlog. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:34, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Some advice
Hi, Callanecc, I was hoping to get some advice from you. This week, I've run into three relatively new editors (2-3 months) who spend most of their time posting on user pages and user talk pages. They are either young or pretending to be young. I've posted the "Misplaced Pages is not a social network" message on some talk pages and at least one editor is taking the message to heart. But for the editors who continue with this behavior (which includes asking other editors to offer personal information to them), how long is this tolerated? This could be a new editor who doesn't understand the purpose of Misplaced Pages or it could be a troll, wasting our time. How much rope/time is given before showing a clueless editor to the exit? Liz 15:44, 3 March 2016 (UTC)