This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sca (talk | contribs) at 13:42, 28 October 2022 (→Unblocking: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 13:42, 28 October 2022 by Sca (talk | contribs) (→Unblocking: reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
No RfXs since 17:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC).—Talk to my owner:Online |
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
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 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Clarification and Amendment requestsCurrently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.
Arbitrator motions| Motion name | Date posted |
|---|---|
| Arbitrator workflow motions | 1 December 2024 |
 | I WILL NOT SIGN A LOYALTY OATH TO THE WMF. And I call on all advanced permission holders on all projects to resist the Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement guidelines provisions requiring one, but also not to quit over it. If enough of us refuse, they will have to back down. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC) |
−
AOZ
Hi, Beeblebrox. You deleted this page in 2016 as a Neelix redirect. Would you mind if I restore it? I was going to create it myself with the same target (Uab Meto language, our only article about something called "AOZ") before I even noticed the deleted history. -- Tamzin (she|they|xe) 09:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
- Any user in good standing is perfectly free to recreate any of those redirects. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:31, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – October 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that if the rationale for a block depends on information that is not available to all administrators, that information should be sent to the Arbitration Committee, a checkuser or an oversighter for action (as applicable, per ArbCom's recent updated guidance) instead of the administrator making the block.
- Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
- Community comment on the revised Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines is requested until 8 October.
Technical news
- The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.
Arbitration
- Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
- A modification to the deletion RfC remedy in the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been made to reaffirm the independence of the RfC and allow the moderators to split the RfC in two.
- The second phase of the 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review closes 3 October.
Miscellaneous
- An administrator's account was recently compromised. Administrators are encouraged to check that their passwords are secure, and reminded that ArbCom reserves the right to not restore adminship in cases of poor account security. You can also use two-factor authentication (2FA) to provide an extra level of security.
- Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections open 2 October and close 8 October.
- You are invited to comment on candidates in the 2022 CUOS appointments process.
- An RfC is open to discuss whether to make Vector 2022 the default skin on desktop.
- Tech tip: You can do a fuzzy search of all deleted page titles at Special:Undelete.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Conversation involving you on my Wikisource user page
@Beeblebrox and Kudpung: please see my user talk page at Wikisource:
There's an ongoing discussion related to an old user block you were both involved in. I had nothing to do with the block, but mentioned it on an AFD discussion, and the blocked user is now looking for answers. — Maile (talk) 00:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
- I have answered this on Wikisource because that was the first ping I saw. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Unblocking
I agree that it is disappointing that you seem unable or unwilling to address the actual reasons for the block, but it is already under discussion at ANI and your talk page, so we don't need a third discussion here. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2022 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I wish to appeal my block, but can't figure out from the guidance where one files an appeal. – Sca (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- Where can I see the decision in this case? -- Sca (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- In the ANI thread you have already been participating in. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:12, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Beeblebrox: On my talk, I wrote and attempted to post (file) an appeal, but somehow it doesn't look right. Could you please take a look at it and see if I made some formatting mistake? Thanks. – Sca (talk) 20:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Done --- Very disappointing. – Sca (talk) 13:41, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Reply
On 10/26, you said:
- I know Misplaced Pages is different things to different people, but you are only blocked from one single page, a page you have been blocked from before, for essentially the same reason: using it as a forum for your attempts at humor. This unblock request gives me no confidence that the intended message has been received. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:25, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, it's been received all right – like a haymaker punch to the solar plexus. Here's what I said (by email) to another old Wikipedian:
- "This week I had a major setback when I was blocked from ITN due to a simple misunderstanding. I was distraught. I won't bore you with the details, but it was all over one word. My appeal was rejected."
- I don't know what more I could have said to persuade you, and others, that my contrition is sincere and that I have learned my lesson. I would never attempt humor at ITN again. NEVER! Nor would I EVER post anything that might be misconstrued as 'racist.'
This seems to me an impossible state of affairs, sort of a Catch-22. I feel trapped and helpless. Please listen to me. I am a caring and responsible person with many years of professional experience in writing and editing. ITN was the one area of Misplaced Pages where I felt I could make a significant contribution – not only to Wiki, but also to the reading public. It was an important part of my life (in retirement). Help! – Sca (talk) 13:42, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, it's been received all right – like a haymaker punch to the solar plexus. Here's what I said (by email) to another old Wikipedian: