| Revision as of 14:56, 12 September 2024 edit89.242.10.117 (talk) →AN3 decision: ReplyTags: Reverted Reply← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 21:45, 9 January 2025 edit undoMalcolmxl5 (talk | contribs)Administrators149,241 edits →Thomas Partey: Thanks.Tag: Reply |
| (155 intermediate revisions by 49 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|maxarchivesize = 30K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 30K |
|
|counter = 95 |
|
|counter = 97 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|
|algo = old(48h) |
|
|algo = old(48h) |
| Line 19: |
Line 19: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== AN3 decision == |
|
== Block == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Block with. All project ] (]) 11:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
I've had a handful of thanks since posting . I'm thinking of asking at AN if what you said has consensus support amongst admins. Not to seek any sort of sanction against you or DrKay (I've never had any reason to think you're not a good/effective admin) but just to clarify if what you said is indeed an unwritten rule applied by the admin corps - if it is I'm surprised but I'd like to know. So before I do that I just want to check if you're absolutely sure of your position on that. ] (]) 20:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
* Sorry, I'm not sure what this means. ] 11:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
:Btw, what I said at AN3 was more combative than i should have been. Sorry about that. I was just a little shocked at the time to be honest. ] (]) 20:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:: No problem! I think it's just common sense more than anything else - you've got a drive-by editor inserting unsourced OR into an FA, and someone trying to keep it out. I can't ever see a situation in which they should be sanctioned for that. ] 20:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Thank you again for taking the time to look. A couple of things we might want to take forward to any AN discussion; is a "drive-by" editor an official thing here, and if so, what is the opposite of a drive-by editor? I've probably been one for the majority of my 200,000 edits. I had no idea it gave you fewer rights to expect others to treat you fairly and abide by policy. ] is a very dangerous rationale to use for administrative decisions in my opinion. It was common sense among white people for a very long time that black people could be bought and sold as slaves, for example. I definitely prefer a rationale based on policy and community consensus. I don't think that an FA should be exempt from normal editing practices, in the absence of a community consensus to that effect. <small>(I know there's a procedure for leniency for TFA, but this is not relevant here.)</small> The FAC process isn't perfect and we do get some clunkers promoted sometimes. The principle that (generally speaking) "anyone can edit" and the prohibition on edit-warring are the most important things in a wiki. The behaviour of edit-warring, being an admin, and issuing a templated warning, is in my opinion a highly worrying intersection behaviorally, and I was surprised you didn't pick up on that. I don't therefore think that you made the right decision there, but so it goes. See you at AN, maybe. ] (]) 12:23, 22 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Thomas Partey == |
|
BLACK KITE should know ALL accreditation bodies charge for the accreditation process. Anyhow, there is no evidence of these fake claims by a cabal of competitors. Show us the hard evidence that we closed down, were sued, tax issues etc etc. 2024 - 51 years and still going strong. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can you have a look at the antics at ] please? The short story is that the police have been investigating allegations made about a Premier League player and a file has been passed to the CPS but neither have named the individual (and they can’t due to privacy rules regarding the identification of suspects) meaning any sources naming anyone are conjecture. We have a young editor persisting adding the accusations to the article and talk page who will not stop. They have a CTOP notification. — ] (]) 21:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
:Name a college or university that has not had a controversy since its founding. ] (]) 14:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
* {{u|Malcolmxl5}} Indefinitely blocked and every edit revision deleted. I've also semi-protected the article. Thanks, ] 21:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*:Thanks. — ] (]) 21:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
==Notice of noticeboard discussion== |
|
|
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:AN-notice--> The thread is ] ] (]) 17:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
