Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ScottishFinnishRadish (talk | contribs) at 14:00, 21 November 2024 (→Warnings, blocks, and overriding judgement: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"And while I'm alive, I'll make tiny changes to earth." Frightened Rabbit

Black Kite Hi, I'm an administrator here, and have been since 2007. I'll try to answer any questions here as soon as I can, though I do have periods where I'm not available. For admins: if you think I've done something really f***ing stupid and I don't respond to a question about it, please feel free to reverse it ... we can work it out later on.

For Talk Page Archives, click here.

If you email me via Misplaced Pages, please leave me a note here (unless there's a good reason you do not want that fact to be public). I do check my Misplaced Pages email fairly regularly, but not that regularly.

Revision deletion request

Many thanks for your quick response. Could I request one more please, at ? Wikishovel (talk) 21:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Wikishovel Done - thanks. Black Kite (talk) 21:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Your revert

There is a section in the t/p in which 2 editors expressed an objection to this paragraph-. Including my own issues with it, that makes it 3 editors. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 21:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

In light of this apparent consensus to not include that paragraph, could you please revert your edit? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 21:35, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

The edit you made that Black Kite reverted was not a reflection of the discussion, though. In it, both DataCrusader1999 and myself agree that the article needs to be rewritten (bolding mine). To claim I said that a specific paragraph and only a specific paragraph should be removed is wrong. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:29, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the lead needs to be rewritten and that the highlighted paragraph about a diplomatic row is undue weight for the lead section of a BLP article. In fact, I feel more strongly than ever that either the scope of this article needs to change, or that content regarding the diplomatic row should be split. This what you said on October 15, one day after this version of the article-.

And this is what DataCrusader said: The below paragraph should be mentioned in the diplomatic-fallout section. under the section title change in lede of the article. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 00:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

...but you removed the content, you did not move it. I said rewrite not delete. Stop twisting my words now. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  01:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm in favour of moving/reinstating that paragraph to the Criminal Investigation/Diplomatic fallout section? Is that something we can both agree on? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Warnings, blocks, and overriding judgement

That thread is already going to be bad enough without adding this tangent, so I'll bring it here. Your judgement was still that a block wasn't necessary in that situation, and although you did say another admin could block it would still be overriding your judgement in that case. I didn't feel so strongly that you were wrong in this instance that I'd take another action, just said it's not the action I would have taken. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)