Misplaced Pages

User talk:Will Beback

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BDD (talk | contribs) at 23:50, 3 June 2014 (Notification: listing at redirects for discussion of September 11, 2011 attacks. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:50, 3 June 2014 by BDD (talk | contribs) (Notification: listing at redirects for discussion of September 11, 2011 attacks. (TW))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


Template:Archive box collapsible

A beer for you!

Hope you come back one day. --evrik  23:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Will, I hope that ArbCom takes up your appeal and agrees to allow you to return to editing. Cullen Let's discuss it 01:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Current status

redacted

Have restored this content. No reason to delete it without going through proper channels. Arbcom is free to not comment. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

handling of unblock request

At Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#change_to_block_of_User:Will_Beback I've asked the Arbitration Committee about its response to the unblock request. —rybec 21:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I hope that you can soon continue the necessary, good work that you did if you can promise not be overzealous again and promise not to out people again. Andries (talk) 11:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Will Beback ban appeal

The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, suspended Will Beback's ("WBB") site-ban on the following terms:

  1. Suspension of ban
    1. WBB's indefinite site-ban is suspended subject to his unconditional acceptance of and continuing compliance with the terms below, the purpose of which is to enable him to return to active content work. Failure to comply fully with the letter and spirit of these terms may result in the committee revoking the suspension without warning and reinstating the indefinite ban.
    2. For purposes of enforcement, "on-wiki" refers to any edit in any namespace on the English Misplaced Pages or on any Project or mailing list or email system hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation or in any IRC channel with "wikipedia" or "wikimedia" in the channel name.
  2. One-way interaction ban
    1. WBB is directed to immediately cease commenting directly or indirectly on-wiki about User:TimidGuy and User:Keithbob. WBB also agrees to not communicate with the above editors, to not contact either their places of work or their colleagues, and to not seek sanctions for them, by any means.
    2. Administrators who receive requests for sanctions are requested to inform the Arbitration Committee by email.
  3. Topic ban: new religious movements
    1. WBB is indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit on-wiki about, or any edit to any page relating to, new religious movements, broadly construed.
    2. This restriction replaces WBB's existing new religious movements topic ban.
  4. Topic ban: conflicts of interest/paid advocacy; real-world identities
    1. WBB is indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit on-wiki relating to conflicts of interest, paid advocacy or the real-world identity of any editor, broadly construed.
    2. WBB agrees to not become involved in any investigation broadly construed, either on- or off-wiki, into the real-world identity of any editor or into their real-world interests and affiliations.
  5. Reconsideration of restrictions
    1. The original 2012 case has been carefully and extensively reviewed by the 2013 and 2014 Arbitration Committees, who have seen no reason to disturb it. No further review of the case will take place.
    2. No request for reconsideration of these restrictions may be made until at least twelve months have elapsed since the date on which the suspension of the ban comes into effect.

The record of the vote on the motion can be seen here. For the Arbitration Committee, Carcharoth (talk) 02:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back, Will!

Live long and prosper! Cullen Let's discuss it 03:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back from me too! TFD (talk) 03:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

What they said. Writegeist (talk) 04:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, welcome back! Herostratus (talk) 04:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Great news. I personally really missed you in the areas where I edit. I'm sure you'll find enough to do outside your topic ban areas to keep you busy! Dougweller (talk) 05:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Winter's over and Will's back? It's a good week for RL and WP. Rivertorch (talk) 13:29, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back. Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back. Andries (talk) 20:16, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I hereby join the chorus of people happy to see you back. Guy (Help!) 22:59, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Just saw this today! It always makes me happy to see an act of justice such as this, although the restriction prohibiting policy discussion is still pretty absurd. Welcome back! ThemFromSpace 20:27, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

O! Happy Day! Will is Back! ```Buster Seven Talk 05:17, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

I check your pages every couple of months to see the progress of your exile, and now, finally, you are back! Misplaced Pages is better for it. Welcome back to the Monkey House. Randy Kryn 18:46 22 May 2014 (UTC)

welcome back Will, the name truly fits, will be back :) look forward to seeing you in all the old places. Darkstar1st (talk) 09:17, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Suspension of site ban

I've unblocked you per the motion suspending your site ban and will be sending a final e-mail to conclude the appeal process. I removed the tags from your user page and user talk page and reduced the protection level on your user page to allow you to edit it. Please feel free to archive your talk page in due course, though you should keep a copy of the restrictions available to refer to. Additionally, as you requested by e-mail, I'm stating here that the terms of your unban do not permit you to discuss or comment on the case that led to your ban. If you have any further questions relating to your restrictions, please e-mail us (the Arbitration Committee) in the first instance. Carcharoth (talk) 03:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

So...

I was gonna say, it's a true test of a person to take his lumps and get back on the horse. I assumed that that you were about to pass that test since you went to the trouble of applying for reinstatement. But you haven't edited since your reinstatement after all, so dunno.

Of course maybe you're burned out or disgusted or disappointed or whatever. Of course it's 100% OK not to edit anymore, it's all purely voluntary here.

I know what I'd do though. I was kicked out of the admin corps for (IMO) insufficient reason and some people figured that I'd leave in a huff. I didn't and I like that about myself. It's a hard-knock world after all.

Everybody's different though. No criticism implied. It's entirely possible that editing doesn't work for you anymore and it's important to do what works for oneself. Best wishes whatever you do. Herostratus (talk) 18:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

I second the motion. Smallbones(smalltalk) 18:46, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

September 11, 2011 attacks listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect September 11, 2011 attacks. Since you had some involvement with the September 11, 2011 attacks redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 23:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)