| Revision as of 19:20, 9 June 2010 editSandstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators188,512 edits You have been blocked from editing in enforcement of an arbitration decision. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:23, 9 June 2010 edit undoSandstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators188,512 edits →The Kafka Award: commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
| ::Well that's very interpertive, but he might be correct, I don't realy know. However, according to and , he was Zionist...It's just funny, thats all. --] (]) 14:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC) | ::Well that's very interpertive, but he might be correct, I don't realy know. However, according to and , he was Zionist...It's just funny, thats all. --] (]) 14:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC) | ||
| {{-}} | |||
| ==Second block== | |||
| <div class="user-block"> ] To enforce an ] decision, you have been ''']''' for a period of '''1 week''' from editing . Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our ] and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC) <hr/><p><small>'''Notice to administrators:''' In a <span class="plainlinks"></span>, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as ] or ]). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the ]. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."</small></div></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock --> | <div class="user-block"> ] To enforce an ] decision, you have been ''']''' for a period of '''1 week''' from editing . Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our ] and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC) <hr/><p><small>'''Notice to administrators:''' In a <span class="plainlinks"></span>, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as ] or ]). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the ]. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."</small></div></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock --> | ||
| This concerns your of the restriction imposed above. The third block will be of indefinite duration. Again, if you disagree with the restriction, it will do you no good to simply disobey it, because it will be enforced with blocks. Instead, if you believe I was wrong to impose the sanction, you may appeal it as provided for in the arbitral decision. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:23, 9 June 2010
hi there.Dr Locke (talk) 15:05, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Removal of image from user page
Hello. Another user asked me on my talk page to remove the image File:Ship to Gaza by Latuff.gif (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) from your user page. I have done so, because according to our policy WP:UP#POLEMIC, "polemical statements unrelated to Misplaced Pages, or statements attacking or vilifying groups of editors or persons" are not allowed on user pages. Please do not reinsert the image, or you may be made subject to formal sanctions under the Arbitration Committee's decision WP:ARBPIA#Discretionary sanctions. Thanks, Sandstein 13:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- It's really sad that some political extremists are allowed to censor my user page. / Achird (talk) 18:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- I have removed the image again after you re-added it. Under the authority of WP:ARBPIA#Discretionary sanctions, you are hereby prohibited from using images that advocate against any party involved in the Israeli-Arab conflict on your user page. If you do not comply with this prohibition, you may be blocked or banned from editing Misplaced Pages without further warning. This sanction is logged at WP:ARBPIA#Log of blocks and bans, and may be appealed as described at WP:ARBPIA#Appeal of discretionary sanctions. Sandstein 21:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Please stop censoring my user page in this highly offensive way! I am a serious wikipedia editor, and I don't want to be attacked in this offensive way! / Achird (talk) 22:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- You do not have a right to free speech on Misplaced Pages. Instead, you are required to comply with community policies, as outlined above, as a condition of being allowed to edit Misplaced Pages. Sandstein 22:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, that is very different from what I am used to on Misplaced Pages. When did this version turn into Nazipedia? And why are you, Sandstein, behaving like an totalitarian asshole? I'll point out that I am not sarcastic or trying to be rude, but just genuinely curious why you behave like this. / Achird (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
June 2010
Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
This block is to enforce the image use restriction imposed above which you violated by your edit at . Please understand that arbitration enforcement procedures are binding. If you disagree with a restriction imposed on you, you are required to comply with it until it is successfully appealed. If you continue to violate the restriction, you will be made subject to increasingly severe sanctions. Sandstein 22:07, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I must protest against this censorship! I am a serious wikipedia editor, and I cannot approve of this kind of censorship protecting political extremists who are approving violence! / Achird (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Solidarity
I share your anger at this censorship of your user page. You may be interested in my own experience of this; I have been banned from using the file Commons:File:No Israel.svg in my user space. There is a discussion of this on my talk page, and another at my rejected appeal. I think that you should appeal against this arbitrary ruling RolandR (talk) 22:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looking at the history here, I see that you and I were both sanctioned after complaints by the same editor, who is banned "from all content and discussions related to the Israeli-Arab conflict, broadly construed and without exception". I agree with your comments about censorship by political extremists. RolandR (talk) 23:18, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your support! / Achird (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
The Kafka Award
RolandR (talk) 22:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
If I'm not wrong, Kafka was quite related to Zionism . --Gilisa (talk) 21:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- "we can say, with a fair degree of certainty, that Kafka's gut reaction to the modern national-cultural Jewish enterprise, whether or not he was a Zionist, was one of distaste." -- Dan Miron, Professor of Hebrew and comparative literature at Columbia University, Sadness in Palestine, Haaretz 24 November 2008. RolandR (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well that's very interpertive, but he might be correct, I don't realy know. However, according to this and Page 147 here, he was Zionist...It's just funny, thats all. --Gilisa (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Second block
Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
This concerns your second violation of the restriction imposed above. The third block will be of indefinite duration. Again, if you disagree with the restriction, it will do you no good to simply disobey it, because it will be enforced with blocks. Instead, if you believe I was wrong to impose the sanction, you may appeal it as provided for in the arbitral decision. Sandstein 19:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)