Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Georgewilliamherbert (talk | contribs) at 20:16, 5 November 2010 (→Community sanctions discussion: Community imposes an indef but appealable block, and a set of edit restrictions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

RfC/U

I am concerned that your interactions on Misplaced Pages may be disruptive. I have accordingly opened a "Requests for comment" to invite community review at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Xanderliptak. This RfC/U is not yet certified and may not be. Currently, I am the sole signatory. If another contributor who has attempted to address these concerns with you does not also certify within 48 hours, it will be closed and deleted as "uncertified." If you have not participated extensively in an RfC/U before (I have not), you may find Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Guidance2 helpful, especially the section "If you're the subject of an RFC/U". --Moonriddengirl 20:35, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

O'Donovan arms

Hi Xander. Since I see you are involved in a dispute about things I don't understand at all and don't want to, I'm perfectly happy to take down the arms from all pages like you did. When the other user restored them I just assumed it was all worked out, not understanding the issue. Now I see it is not, although I still don't understand any of it. But thank you very much for drawing them and I am glad to see them in your sample gallery at your website. I have now removed them from all pages here. DinDraithou (talk) 21:09, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I look forward to seeing O'Conor Don's!

Roux, whom I don't know, has restored the arms, and I, as their original (spiritual) "commissioner" have removed them again. Since I am a descendant of the last inaugurated lord/flaith/prince and a cousin, if a very distant and quite poor one, of the modern Lords of Clancahill I get to have my way here, I think. I hope. As their representative I own the message of four of those articles, and the fifth, Irish heraldry, I don't see much case for, since you are the artist and they don't necessarily need to be there since others could be used. DinDraithou (talk) 22:03, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Now I know the name of a major problem. I feel for you, Xander. And yes I intend to use my otherwise worthless female line pedigree from the medieval family to respect your wishes in these articles. Who knows how I will but it sure sounds impressive! I'll wave my spiritual White Wand in their direction or something and send the enemy scattering! DinDraithou (talk) 22:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Perfectly put. It's obviously a little nuts, or maybe just stupid. Anyway, User_talk:FisherQueen#Those_arms is the place to be. I've got myself sounding right important. And I have no intention of entering the discussion you know where because that would dignify you know what. DinDraithou (talk) 00:34, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

This is the weirdest discussion ever and such a spectacular waste of time! Anyway, you know I don't want to get blocked for removing the images again so we'll just have to let the character win for now and let the "experienced" (lazy) admin feel more experienced. I have other things to do. But at least you can use this, whatever it was, in the future as evidence of... nonsense? DinDraithou (talk) 01:07, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

A mess and hastle it is. I've had problems with a few editors in the past and have occasionally told myself to learn some procedure, but never have. Part of it is that I just forget too soon and don't care, but also I can't remember where I've had repeated and repeated problems with the same one... so I probably haven't. In your case you are more likely to because of what you have to offer and defend. I've followed less than 1% of it but there was one discussion I saw a while ago where you were making a sophisticated defense and none of the maybe five editors disagreeing with you were really saying anything. But I guess if you bring not only specialized but arcane knowledge to a place like this it will sometimes happen. Then it is your artwork and some people may think you are advertising, nonsense because you'll hardly make much money this way. It's Misplaced Pages! People aren't coming here to see arms so they are just an unexpected delight. Sure it's a curious place to show off, but there's nothing wrong with just doing that. I do it with some of my own arcane knowledge and just love the slightly weird persona I think I've created. But I've created 80 articles, the majority with good scholarly content, some of it rare, and made major contributions to others. So I can only imagine how I would react if I were challenged like you have been by some people here. Although small and not perfect this unique article is a minor masterpiece and if only slightly expanded with some easily written original narrative could be of journal quality. The research is that good and yet I offer it for free. But it's not a pretty picture, the laws concerning which form of knowledge are different. DinDraithou (talk) 03:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Since DD deleted this from their talkpage, here you go. This will *help* you.

It really is that simple actually. Just go to WP:AN/I. Post a concise summary of the problem. Include specific diffs which show the exact problem is occurring, and that you have attempted to resolve it. That's really all you need to do. I will point out, however, that the diffs are the most important part. You should ensure that every allegation is supported by one, and that the diff actually says what you say it says. I'll get you started. Click here to start a new section on AN/I. Click here for all of my 21K contributions. This will give you a 50K foot view of policy, while the two collapsible templates below my comment here will provide you with a list of key guidelines and policies. Enjoy.→ ROUX ₪ 02:43, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Wow, 21 thousand edits? It is impressive you have that many problems with editors. XANDERLIPTAK 04:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Warning

. Xanderliptak, first you upset several people, in a way that is your fault entirely, and none of theirs; then you are unbelievably rude when they don't like it. Your battleground behaviour has no place on Misplaced Pages. Stop it right now, or I'll block you for pissing everybody off. Or, if you'd like me to be more formal about it, for violating WP:BATTLE. This is the only warning you're going to receive for your disruptive edits. Bishonen | talk 06:39, 25 October 2010 (UTC).

Notice

Your claim that I stole an image and uploaded it to commons is an outrageous lie, and I am reporting you to WP:ANI. I have also notified the board at commons, since your lie spans both sites. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 03:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Xander, if you got two people confused, please just strike whatever comments of yours remain where you described one when you meant to describe the other. Alternatively, strike the wrong name and replace it with the correct one. Digging your feet in does not help.--Chaser (talk) 05:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Community sanctions discussion

See this discussion on the administrators' noticeboard in which community sanctions growing out of the RFC/U filed against you are being discussed. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Editing restrictions and indefinite block

The consensus of the community from the above discussion is both that you should be indefinitely blocked from editing until you request an unblock and convince an administrator that you agree to abide by policy going forwards, and apply a specific set of editing restictions.

As noted, the indefinite block is not permanent, or a community ban. The sense of the community is that you may be able to contribute constructively at some point in the future, and the door remains open for you to convince us of that and return.

The editing restrictions will apply if you return and are unblocked, however.

The editing restrictions imposed are: user:Xanderliptak:

1. is forbidden, indefinitely, from uploading images which are in violation of WP:WATERMARK.
2. is forbidden, indefinitely, from attempting to change licencing conditions after upload of artwork he has created. The sole exception will be removing licencing conditions; any attempt to add or further restrict the licencing he agreed to at upload is forbidden.
3. is forbidden, indefinitely, from participating in any discussions about image policy.
4. is required, indefinitely, to prominently link all accounts he uses together at the top of each user page. (Note that on Commons such linking ended up having to be done by administrators who then had to fully protect each user page to prevent Xanderliptak from removing the linking. This may need to be done here.)
5. is required, indefinitely, to provide accurate diffs of any allegation he makes about another editor.
6. is required, indefinitely, to provide accurate diffs of any claims that another editor has said or done something.

   In regards to the above two requirements, any user may remove allegations/etc which Xanderliptak has made if he fails to provide diffs in a reasonable time.

7. is forbidden, indefinitely, from summarizing any discussions held elsewhere, and is restrained to direct comments supported by diffs only.
8. All of the above to be very broadly construed.
9. Violations to be met with the usual series of escalating blocks.
10. Restrictions to take effect on Xanderliptak's first edit (with any account) after this date, or upon granting of an unblock as listed in Proposal 3, whichever is later.
11. May appeal these restrictions six months after implementation, or six months after the end of the most recent block for violation, whichever is later.

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2010 (UTC)