| Revision as of 08:47, 21 February 2013 editRidjalA (talk | contribs)478 editsm →Blocked for sockpuppetry: adding minor emphasis← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:23, 24 November 2015 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,142,123 edits →ArbCom elections are now open!: new section | ||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Salutations, | |||
| :Please leave comments or questions below this line. For past discussions, please check this page's history. | |||
| ------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| Hi,<br> | |||
| == Suggestion regarding La Luz del Mundo content == | |||
| You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692225944 --> | |||
| RidjalA please state which specific current content in the article you are unhappy with (In a new section on the talk page). I know that you do not like the discrimination section because it goes against your POV that the Church is a massive financial institution that conspires with the Mexican Government and Mexican journalists to cause all sorts of mayhem. Perhaps we could open a discussion on the content in the Dispute Resolution? I believe that's the most civilized way, as opposed to accusing people and making personal attacks. You seemed content with my treatment of the history section, I don't see why that can't be replicated elsewhere. | |||
| Speaking of personal attacks, if you keep accusing me of being payed or otherwise compensated by any third party, or lumping me with Ajaxfiore, I am afraid that I will have to report you. I beleive that you have been warned before by other outside editors in the talk page and by myself on this issue multiple times. ] (]) 01:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :Hello Fordx12, hope you're well. I've made it clear in the talk page that I feel the discrimination section needs an overhaul. One recent editor wikinuevo was pretty vocal about some of those edits, too. He stated that the data distorts the NPOV in such a manner that it makes it seem as though the church is being slanderously targeted. But that's beyond the scope of our discussion, perhaps we can move this discussion back into the talk page like you suggested. | |||
| :I've been sharing my POV that I'm not convinced you guys have much interest in genuinely contributing to ''the improvement of the entirety'' of the article (you guys keep removing Erdely as a source, and anyone who knows about the church knows how much LLDM adherents and associates hate Erdely). I'm not saying that you and Ajaxfiore are terrible people, but you guys come off as instruments that the LLDM leadership is utilizing for improving their personal image: SJF already implements services from lawyers, television/media (Casa Cultural Berea), computer programmers, PR people, Incondicionales, and so many others to help improve and promote SJF's image after the turmoil from the scandals. I wouldn't doubt that someone was formally designated as a Wiki-editor as well by ''El Apostol de Dios''. I'm suspicious about some of your guy's data too, and where you're getting that data from as only those associated with the 'Apostol of God' would have any vetted interest and have the proper channels of providing the obscure data that you guys are providing to debase Erdely. | |||
| :BTW, have you noticed that the vandalization campaign against the article page has ceased for almost an entire year now? I wonder what made them call it off? I remember at one point we couldn't even go a week without the page being brutally vandalized. | |||
| :Many blessings, ] (]) 05:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::I actually "sighed" when I read this. This wasn't an invitation for you to voice your conspiracy theories. I am sure this conspiracy is very real to you. You were told to drop this by other editors including administrators. Besides, you seem awfully defensive of Erdely when no one else seems to share this opinion of yours. Perhaps there's another conspiracy going on here? It's strange that Wikinuevo came out of no where and made edits that you'd agree with. Perhaps you're both related to Erdely somehow....You see how easy it is to accuse someone of being involved in a conspiracy? I think I'll prepare a DRN report and settle some of the content there. You'll be given the proper notice. ] (]) 15:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ==Notice of Dispute resolution discussion== | |||
| ] | |||
| Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "]". | |||
| {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;" | |||
| |- | |||
| | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | | |||
| {{collapse top|bg=#cae1ff|bg2=#f0f8ff|Guide for participants}} | |||
| If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the '''''"Request dispute resolution"''''' button below this guide or go to ] for an easy to follow, step by step request form. | |||
| {{center|'''What this noticeboard is:'''}} | |||
| * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after ] discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction. | |||
| {{center|'''What this noticeboard is not:'''}} | |||
| * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about '''article content''', not disputes about '''user conduct'''. | |||
| * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are ] at other ]. | |||
| * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been ] (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. | |||
| * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy. | |||
| {{center|'''Things to remember:'''}} | |||
| * Discussions should be ], calm, ], ], and objective. Comment only about the article's ''content'', not ]. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. | |||
| * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{tls|drn-notice}} on their user talk page. | |||
| * Sign and date your posts with ] {{nowrap|"<code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>"}}. | |||
| * If you ever need any help, ask one of ], who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located ] and on the DR/N talkpage. | |||
| {{collapse bottom}} | |||
| Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!<!--Template:DRN-notice--> ] <sup>''] / ]''</sup> 16:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == AN/I notice == | |||
| Hello. There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ].The discussion is about the topic ]. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 04:10, 7 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Vandalism tags == | |||
| Please do not place vandalism tags on my talk page as you did . Please read ] to understand wiki policies. ] (]) 00:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Your input would be appreciated at ] == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| I am a volunteer at the ], helping to moderate a content dispute in which you may have been involved. There are open questions there that I think it would be useful to have your input on. | |||
| Thanks. | |||
| -- ] (]) 03:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Hello, from a DR/N volunteer == | |||
| ] | |||
| This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current ] case still awaiting comments and replies. {{#ifeq:failed|failed | |||
| |If this dispute has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties and no further comment is made at the opened filing, it may be failed and suggested that the next logical course of action be formal mediation. Please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Failed". | |||
| |If this dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties, please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Resolved". | |||
| }} If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. ] (]) 20:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Hello, from a DR/N volunteer == | |||
| ] | |||
| This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current ] case still awaiting comments and replies. {{#ifeq:failed|failed | |||
| |If this dispute has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties and no further comment is made at the opened filing, it may be failed and suggested that the next logical course of action be request for comment. Please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Failed". | |||
| |If this dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties, please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Resolved". | |||
| }} If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. ] (]) 22:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Blocked for sockpuppetry == | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| | style = background: #f8eaba; | |||
| | image = ] | |||
| | text = '''''This account has been ] ''''' from editing for a period of '''2 weeks''' for ] per evidence presented at ]. Note that multiple accounts are ], ''but'' using them for ] reasons '''is not'''. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to ]. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on the page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the ] first. ''']]]''' 10:22, 20 February 2013 (UTC)<!-- Template:SockBlock --> | |||
| }} | |||
| {{unblock|1=I've been erroneously mistaken for another user. A CU was inconclusive, but I was blocked anyway (??). | |||
| I've been taking extensive breaks from editing Misplaced Pages, and coming back online only to stumble upon a quarrel happening on my favorite[REDACTED] page (]) in which I resulted the victim of collateral damage. | |||
| I frequently have open communication with users who edit that page, and '''that''' alone is not grounds for lumping me with any of those users. Further, given that my voice is an antithesis to some very specific editors on that page (usually religious articles tend have such polarized differences), I have no reason to risk losing my editing privileges for something so low as sockpuppetry. That is '''not''' how I work. My philosophy is "boldness, communication, and honesty". | |||
| Given Wikinuevo's message on the article's talk page , I noticed the user had trouble with the English language, and asked for that user to instead post their message in Spanish if it made it easier for them. (why this was grounds for tying me to meat puppetry, God only knows, and God is my witness that I am not involved in any way or form with this user). | |||
| I found that the user in question may have also been in a with another user who edits both the English and Spanish versions of that page, and it seems like the quarrel spilled over to the English version (both of them were blocked for it and ). That it happened during one of my breaks has nothing to do with me, and is purely coincidental. For all we know, that user's IP address is from Latin America since the CU was inconclusive. Regardless, I normally would state that "I feel" or "I believe" that something or someone is wrong. But in this case, I resolutely affirm that this block was erroneous. | |||
| What strikes me as odd is that this whole ordeal happened more than a month ago, too. Thus, because of the weak, if not nonexistent, evidence for meatpuppetry/sockpuppetry, I kindly ask that this block be reviewed. Most respectfully, ] (]) 22:47, 20 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ::A side note, I forgot to mention that the editor who was (from my POV) ''hastily'' pushing to issue this block was the same person who volunteered in a recent DRN case which involved me. The user never notified me of the pending sockpuppet case he had issued, nor was I afforded the opportunity to present this and other evidence to my defense. , that editor in the DRN stated: | |||
| :::"Again, I think a key component here is willingness to let bygones be bygones. This means not opening up old wounds or criticizing for past '''perceived''' '' wrongs, ''or even pointing them out''. If this is going to work, given the heated nature of the discussion, everyone needs to cool down, and just start afresh." | |||
| ::This editor proceeded to try and get me blocked anyway, and with very weak evidence. This to me seems like a bad faith move. I should state that I do not feel comfortable with that user to overlook and transform the La Luz del Mundo page, especially not while I am blocked. Unlike other admins or senior editors who have fairly contributed to that page in the past, I feel that this user at any point may have too much of an impartial interest to self-designate themselves to edit and overlook that page. In the best of interests, ] (]) 03:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC)}} | |||
Latest revision as of 14:23, 24 November 2015
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)