| Revision as of 18:58, 1 October 2015 editHJ Mitchell (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators121,932 edits →BLP discretionary sanctions alert: new sectionTag: contentious topics alert← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:55, 2 September 2016 edit undoNeilN (talk | contribs)134,455 edits →Note: new sectionTag: contentious topics alertNext edit → | ||
| (312 intermediate revisions by 71 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| | algo = old( |
| algo = old(5d) | ||
| | archive = User talk:DHeyward/Archive %(counter)d | | archive = User talk:DHeyward/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| | counter = |
| counter = 21 | ||
| | maxarchivesize = 50K | | maxarchivesize = 50K | ||
| | archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} | | archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{archive box | auto=yes }} | |||
| *] Created ]. ] | |||
| *] Created ], ] | |||
| *] Created ], ] | |||
| *] Created ], ] | |||
| *] Created 05:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Created 15:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Created 04:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Created 01:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Created 05:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Created --] (]) 08:03, 30 September 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *] created --] (]) 03:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
| *] created --] (]) 09:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| <!-- begin date code --> | <!-- begin date code --> | ||
| <div style="border:0px solid #ccc; background: none; text-align: center; padding:3px; float:right; font-size: smaller; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 1.144;"> | <div style="border:0px solid #ccc; background: none; text-align: center; padding:3px; float:right; font-size: smaller; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 1.144;"> | ||
| Line 41: | Line 24: | ||
| == A page you started (2016 Nice terrorist attack) has been reviewed! == | |||
| == UTRS Account Request == | |||
| I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. <!-- Please sign with THREE tildes (~~~), NOT four. This avoids archive bots archiving this message before your account gets approved. --> ] (]) | |||
| == Morehead == | |||
| I trust you mean "Morehouse"?--] (]) 22:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Doh. Yes. Thanks! --] (]) 22:20, 5 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Topic ban == | |||
| It occurs to me that your comments at ] and on my talk page are in direct violation of . This is exactly the kind of vexatious behavior that the topic ban was designed to prevent. Given that I should not be operating the block button or heavy machinery at the moment, I'll give you the evening to explain why this might not be and deal with this in the morning. ] <small>(])</small> 00:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Everyone needs to chill about all this. {{ping|Gamaliel}}, maybe just let this go.--] 00:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Sure. I don't really need the hassle. ] <small>(])</small> 02:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Or just email me? Bernstein canvasses for support off-wiki via Twitter etc and if this particular situation crosses over some on-wiki line then I'm quite happy to deal with it by other means. It is no secret that I have been compiling an ArbCom case. - ] (]) 00:48, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :For {{u|Gamaliel}} to enforce this topic ban against DHeyward after twice declining to enforce it against MarkBernstein would be nothing short of absurd. Which means, given my experience with Gamaliel and MarkBernstein, we can probably expect it to happen any moment now. ] (]) 00:52, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::While I don't recall what alleged instances you are referring to, I have declined to enforce lots of possible sanctions against lots of people. There is a long list of instances where DHeyward has escaped sanctions, for example. But there aren't internet boards full of people coming to Misplaced Pages to complain that he hasn't been blocked yet. ] <small>(])</small> 02:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :It's a 3-way IBAN. Considering it was brought up on the AE request by Liz a while ago, it would be stale to act on it now since it closed. Second, you are the admin that imposed it. Appealing to uninvolved admins and especially the imposing admin is one of my only recourse to provide information. Leaving that information on your talk page, rather than AE is in the exact nature and spirit of what you said the Interaction Ban included. If you don't want to place it on the AE page, that's your discretion. As Starke Hathaway noted, I asked you to drop IBAN or enforce it numerous times and each time you whittled it away in its scope to where I only understand it to prevent me from bringing new actions. Had you not closed it so quickly, my recourse is to ask you to put on the AE request which would have been the same thing as what I did. I would find it rather odd to complain about your talk page when it wasn't on article space or noticeboard space which is where you complained about it being disruptive, but your talk page where it is permitted. When implementing it, you seemed to think invoking the Interaction Ban so that Orlando Thargor and I could not bring AE action against MB, it would end MB's appearances at the noticeboards. That did not happen. It would be rather punitive to somehow enforce this as an IBAN violation when the only reason is another close of another MB appearance at another admin board. --] (]) 01:46, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :: The intent of the topic ban was to get all three of you to stop complaining about one another. And yet, here you are complaining about him. I've looked at the log and the sanction has not been officially modified in any way, so it is still in force. I'm sure Sitush or MONGO would be glad to post any list of diffs you feel you need to post to AE. ], now. Consider this an official reminder, which I am logging. ] <small>(])</small> 02:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::Oh no...MONGO definitely not interested in anything with the word arbitration in it...I can always go see my ex mother-in-law if I want some agony in my life.--] 03:39, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::Orlando and I never complained about or discussed each other. MB filed back-to-back AE requests because we commented on him at ARBCA (. Your solution was the IBAN believing that it would reduce the drama at AE. This all played out when he was topic-banned and that was all unwound when Dreadstar went supernova. After that I requested it be dropped or enforced. Multiple times regarding both comments on talk page, reverts and comments on admin noticeboards. Each time, you declined to remove the topic ban and explained the "intent" didn't include all those things. Asking anyone else to post my material would be canvassing. The only avenue is providing material to uninvolved admins as it is explicitly stated as allowed. I emailed the material to all commenting admins prior, except you, frankly due to perceived hostility to me. They didn't acknowledge receipt prior to your close, save for one that said they weren't able to review immediately. However, I will take your reminder to heart as I understand the concern you have articulated and what you believe I did wrong and I will take a few days to consider my options. I would hope you would also seriously consider the advice you gave Masem regarding the GGC article and consider it for your own AE enforcement participation where MB is concerned. It is good advice and you have been involved in GGC enforcement for over a year which I am sure is taking its toll. Enforcing admins have come and gone and perhaps a clean slate is not a bad idea. --] (]) 04:59, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I have been trying to become less involved. At AE, for the last several GG requests I've merely commented instead of imposing sanctions or taking actions, which is why that ridiculous drama fest that was the last request went on for five days instead of two. This makes it frustrating when people bring long complaints to my talk page demanding I take action while simultaneously complaining about my involvement. ] <small>(])</small> 12:50, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::But you put your comments in the uninvolved administrators section. This puts doubt on whether your intentions to become less involved are sincere. If you must make comments on AE, Also, hatting the discussion counts as taking an action to me. ] (]) 13:41, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Nobody is denying that was an action. Were I attempting to be more active, it is an action I would have taken days earlier. ] <small>(])</small> 13:54, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::If you were attempting to be less active, then you would have waited until either another admin closed it; Or until most of the arguments made in AE were addressed. Yes, it is a dramafest, but it isn't senseless, mindless banter. ] (]) 14:21, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Perhaps there were some sensible arguments buried in the drama somewhere. Next time we need to do a better job of policing the statements so they can't be manipulated by outside interests for the lulz. ] <small>(])</small> 15:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::: {{u|Gamaliel}}, if it is your sincere belief that discussing the AE request against MarkBernstein is a violation of a sanction you imposed on DHeyward, why are you continuing to discuss it with third parties on DHeyward's talk page? Surely this discussion would be more apropos on your own talk page, no? ] (]) 15:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::You're right. Anyone who wishes to discuss this should take this elsewhere. DHeyward can archive or delete this as he sees fit. ] <small>(])</small> 15:21, 6 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Just for the record == | |||
| I know we disagree on a great many things, but I believed you to be a reasonable and principled person. It would appear I was wrong about that. Pity. ] (]) 03:11, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :{{u|Dumuzid}} I'm not sure what prompted that comment but I am a reasonable and principled person. A little more detail would be appreciated..--] (]) 03:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Topic ban == | |||
| I have removed your statement at ] as a violation of your topic ban. Perhaps you are frustrated about what happened to Masem off-site, but the violator was not Mark Bernstein and the violator has already been blocked. ] <small>(])</small> 16:56, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :{{ping|Gamaliel}}...don't you mean interaction ban? Unless I'm mistaken, he violated your interaction ban....DHeyward is not topic banned too is he?--] 18:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Topic banned from the topic of Mark Bernstein. I didn't make it an interaction ban so they could discuss edits if necessary. ] <small>(])</small> 19:10, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks for the clarification...due to my denseness, I am oftentimes in need of clarification.--] 17:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{hat|reason=not the place for this}} | |||
| == Uncalled for and violation of BLP == | |||
| This was nasty and uncalled for. Partially refactored. - ] ] 22:06, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :No, it wasn't. McVeigh could have bought diesel fuel and ammonium nitrate all day long and mixed them in barrels. It became notable when he blew something up. Farmers use that combination all the time on tree stumps, but again not notable. The fear was that this clock meant more than just a clock and until it is more than a clock, it's not notable. It's another kid that made a mistake by chewing a pop tart into a gun or writing a story about shooting dinosaurs. He got suspended for 3 days like many high schoolers do when they incite fear. I'd rather not immortalize this incident. The race and/or religious element is being way overblown and any kid that did this in a school would have been subjected to the same thing. Please remember that "zero tolerance" is the problem and kids that bring in a steak knife to cut steak get suspended. It's not worthy of an article though unless it becomes a mass shooting/stabbing/bombing. Clocks aren't notable, bombs are. --] (]) | |||
| :: It is still uncalled for. The subject is a 14-year old and a living person, and to imply as you said that {{tq|if he uses his clock to blow something up, we can add it later}} was a nasty comment given the circumstances. If you made that implication without thinking of how it will be perceived, then say it. - ] ] 23:15, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::What circumstances? That high school kids do stupid stuff and everything is perceived as a threat and there is zero tolerance? Keep in mind that kids are shot and killed for toy guns. Many more are detained at school for toy guns and given suspensions. Unless they shoot up the school, we don't give them articles. Why did you perceive it as 'nasty'? --] (]) 23:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::: I'll assume good faith, but your tone deafness is surprising. - ] ] 00:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Odd clock in a suitcase...looks like a red flag to me...coupled with the fact that Moslems commit most of the terrorism today not sure I can blame some for being suspicious. How it was handled by the authorities though is indeed appaling, and IMO should lead to at least one termination.--] 17:07, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: The image floating around doesn't really convey the scale well (8.25in x 5.5in x 2.5in) according to Amazon. Was handled appalling poorly though. — ] (]) 17:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: Good picture. Notice the boards are machine printed; the display and transformer are obviously prefabricated, even the battery backup was left in place. The picture suggests this student did nothing more than disassemble an alarm clock and mount its pieces inside a new case, requiring only basic soldering skills. And the choice of a metal case! with no grounding plug presents serious risk of injury. Thoroughly unimpressive effort even for a teenager. Has any of this been noted in RS? ] (]) 17:32, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Those components can be had from Radio Shack or similar supplier so not sure he actually took a clock radio apart. The question is, was it bring your homemade science project to school day or what?--] 17:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::: Only the transformer is common, the other parts are specific to a single alarm clock which would come pre-wired to the transformer. Upon closer examination not even soldering was involved as the power cable is sandwiched between the sides of the case. Abrade that wire sufficiently and you'll have a nice electrical fire. This student's done nothing beyond destroying a plastic alarm clock case and throwing its parts haphazardly inside a less suitable case. This raises further questions as to motivation. ] (]) 17:51, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::: Looking again it appears the outer insulation was thick enough to prevent the case from closing so the student stripped it away! This "project" would be laughed off any electronics forum. Amazing. ] (]) 18:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{hab}} | |||
| == Uh-mazing == | |||
| Regarding the Ahmed Mohamed arrest/detainment discussion: While I can be pretty rigid at times about policy, I will never understand editors who stick with "We go by what reliable sources say!" even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Yes, we go by what reliable sources say because they are reliable which is synonymous with "Never Wrong!". Gawd. You would think that with Texas law quoted and linked in conjunction with the released police report that proves an arrest never could have occurred, ] would take over, but you've got those who will never bend on this one. I maintain it's due in large part to a severe case of POV. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 16:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :{{re|Winkelvi}} I agree with you that we need to get it right and we have reliable sources. The law and the press release are primary sources, but the Texas AG's guidebook that interprets the law is a definitive secondary source. When I first saw your argument, I was applying the state I am familiar with but it made me look it up. I am asking a few TX LEO's if they make the distinction (they obviously have a different process for juveniles and the press release is spot on with wording taken exactly from the AG guidebook). People get hung up on handcuffs but that's most likely a standard procedure and order for any custodial transport, not just arrests. Someone being taken to a mental health hospital for involuntary committal will be handcuffed behind their back and it's not an arrest. Police are taught from day one to watch hands and control hands because hands can kill. --] (]) 16:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Something I linked to yesterday addressed the use of handcuffs in a detainment situation with a juvenile. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 16:54, 21 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Here's what I think will happen: it will come out, as the Mohamed case develops with CAIR's involvement, that he wasn't arrested but detained. is the beginning of that road. Eventually, it will be clear that he wasn't arrested -- even if the POV pushers and warriors refuse to see/admit it now, that's exactly what happened. We've done pretty much everything we can to prove that isn't what happened, but detainment/investigative hold doesn't fit the agenda of editors who are busy pushing their version of the story and arrest does. I think if we are patient, the truth on this will come out soon - unfortunately, in the meantime, we will have an article that gives the wrong story because of editors who are using policy like robots because the truth is doesn't fit their desired narrative. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 01:04, 22 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :{{re|Winkelvi}}I verified with some Texas police that we are correct. Their software (the ones I talked to) that they use for writing reports. For disposition, the software doesn't allow "arrest" for juveniles as a choice. It can only be "detained," which is brief, or "taken in custody." The report will never say "arrested" for juveniles. Offenders that are adults have "arrested" as an option. Juveniles don't face penalties for the crime, per se, but rather the only finding is delinquency and the court looks for appropriate responses for delinquency. So even if juvenile justice chose to pursue it, it would be a delinquency hearing, not a "hoax bomb" criminal charge. --] (]) 05:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::I figured it would come out that way. Good on you for verifying it. But, is that "reliable" enough for those with an agenda for their discrimination narrative? I doubt it. After all, "reliable sources" are ''never'' wrong! And, it doesn't matter how many other reliable sources are saying "detained", enough sources say "arrested" to suit their purposes, sadly, and that's enough for them to hijack the article (at this time, anyway). -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">] ]</span> 13:47, 23 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == WikiProject Military history coordinator election == | |||
| Greetings from ]! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual ] election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the ] by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, ] <sup>]] ]]</sup> 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:The ed17@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Military_history/Members/Active&oldid=682449732 --> | |||
| == Disputed free use rationale == | |||
| Please do not delete the {{tl|dfu}} template until the rationale is assessed. - ] ] 23:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :I assessed it and removed it after correcting all deficiencies. --] (]) 23:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::By Texas statute: "''Section 552.002(c) specifies that “he general forms 41 in which the media containing public information exist include a book, paper, letter, document, e-mail, Internet posting, text message, instant message, other electronic communication, printout, photograph, film, tape, microfiche, microfilm, photostat, sound recording, map, and drawing and a voice, data, or video representation held in computer memory.''" (web site of ]) | |||
| ::The photograph exceptions given are only: "''Sensitive crime scene image” means a photograph or video recording taken at a crime scene, contained in or part of a closed criminal case, that depicts a deceased person in a state of dismemberment, decapitation, or similar mutilation or that depicts the deceased person’s genitalia."'' | |||
| ::"''A photograph that depicts a peace officer as defined by Article 2.12, Code of Criminal Procedure, the release of which would endanger the life or physical safety of the officer, is excepted from the requirements of Section 552.021 unless: | |||
| ::''(1) the officer is under indictment or charged with an offense by information; | |||
| ::''(2) the officer is a party in a civil service hearing or a case in arbitration; or | |||
| ::''(3) the photograph is introduced as evidence in a judicial proceeding. | |||
| :::''(b) A photograph excepted from disclosure under Subsection (a) may be made public only if the peace officer gives written consent to the disclosure."'' | |||
| ::''"An employee of a governmental body who is also a victim under Subchapter B, Chapter 56, Code of Criminal Procedure, regardless of whether the employee has filed an application for compensation under that subchapter, may elect whether to allow public access to information held by the attorney general’s office or other governmental body that would identify or tend to identify the victim, including a photograph or other visual representation of the victim. An election under this subsection must be made in writing on a form developed by the governmental body, be signed by the employee, and be filed with the governmental body before the third anniversary of the latest to occur of one of the following: | |||
| ::''(1) the date the crime was committed; | |||
| ::''(2) the date employment begins; or | |||
| ::''(3) the date the governmental body develops the form and provides it to employees."'' | |||
| Thanks for creating ], DHeyward! | |||
| Misplaced Pages editor ] just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you: | |||
| ::Also photographs of "minors" participating in recreational activities or programs are exempt. | |||
| <blockquote>Thanks for adding this redirect!</blockquote> | |||
| ::AFAICT, the image is a "public record" under pretty clear Texas law (it was furnished with other documents by an agency subject to Texas law). The photograph was released to the public by an agency subject to Texas law, and can not be "copyright" by that agency, but would only be able, in fact, to be withheld under the stated limited circumstances. As it is not a photograph of ''any'' person or dead body or body parts, that pretty much kills all the reasons for asserting it can not be used under Texas law. ] (]) 23:25, 26 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| To reply, leave a comment on Pianoman320's ]. | |||
| == Conspiracy theories == | |||
| <small>Learn more about ].</small> | |||
| Please join the discussion instead of just reverting. The is the way we solve content disputes in Misplaced Pages. There is a growing list of sources calling these conspiracy theories, and using SYNTH calling these "Contrarian views" or describing them as "alternative narratives" to try to soften the fact that these are indeed nutty and fringe, is nuts (no pun intended) - ] ] 00:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==ANI== | |||
| == Reported to Arbitration Enforcement == | |||
| I guess it was inevitable - ], etc. To emphasize, this is nothing personal. I think we can probably collaborate well in the future once this minor speed bump is resolved. ] (]) 01:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == A cup of coffee for you! == | |||
| Please see ] for a report of your recent ] violations. | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| Thank you, | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | It's a bit early for a beer. Just a little half and half for me, please. ] (]) 14:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == A boilermaker for you == | |||
| — ''']''' (]) 05:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ] 15:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)]] | |||
| ] because not everyone knows this and some might believe it is a conspiracy theory.--] 15:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)]] | |||
| <small>Placing here rather than new section, as it's on same board above. I wanted to let you know about editing a post you added (Re: Bachcell), index was "off" and I fixed that on sub-heading format. Hopefully you don't mind. :-) – ] (]) 22:58, 30 September 2015 (UTC)</small> | |||
| *MONGO, I hadn't even had lunch yet. Come on man. ] (]) 17:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| *:A boilermaker first thing in the morning will put hair on your back and men and women alike want that. Fact!--] 17:24, 25 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| *:: Looks like a good way to check for reptilians as well! Never trust the hairless. I saw the ] on that. Don't forget the UN. --] (]) 20:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Really? == | ||
| I'm not in the mood to get in an edit war <s>with an admin</s> in an area like American politics. But reverting to the last stable version is how ] works. And that's what I did. You should be the one getting consensus for your changes, not the other way around. ] (]) 19:34, 2 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
| Noticed that you moved ] to ] on the basis of it not being retired and to clarify the season. This is a bit of an outdated practice of ] that goes against ]. In particular, ] and ] lend to the "(2015)" not being a part of the title as this is the only iteration of "Joaquin" as a hurricane (and its first usage for a tropical cyclone name globally). The moving of articles without a year because of retirement is in-line with WP:COMMONNAME, as it's assumed the retired name inherits the greatest notability. The six-year gap between name usage doesn't really warrant having the year in the title and we can simply move the article when the time comes. Essentially, the "(2015)" is an unnecessary modifier that can be excluded from the title. ~ ] (]) 06:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| : {{u|Cyclonebiskit}} No worries. I simply presumed that a weak hurricane would be reused and in 6 years we shouldn't need to ddeal with it. Note that ] redirects to the 2015 version so that name reuse won't be an issue in 2021. Disambiguing now sets a naming standard and also prevents broken links later. ] should be the most notable and fixing now prevents errors later. --] (]) 06:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Note == | |||
| == BLP discretionary sanctions alert == | |||
| {{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' | {{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' | ||
| Line 175: | Line 64: | ||
| '''Please carefully read this information:''' | '''Please carefully read this information:''' | ||
| The Arbitration Committee has authorised ] to be used for pages regarding |
The ] has authorised ] to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is ]. | ||
| Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. | Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. | ||
| }}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> | }}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> --] <sup>]</sup> 23:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:55, 2 September 2016
 Archives |
|
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Wednesday 15 January03:49 UTC
Please add comments to the bottom
A page you started (2016 Nice terrorist attack) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating 2016 Nice terrorist attack, DHeyward!
Misplaced Pages editor Pianoman320 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thanks for adding this redirect!
To reply, leave a comment on Pianoman320's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
ANI
I guess it was inevitable - you're mentioned here, etc. To emphasize, this is nothing personal. I think we can probably collaborate well in the future once this minor speed bump is resolved. LavaBaron (talk) 01:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
|
It's a bit early for a beer. Just a little half and half for me, please. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC) |
A boilermaker for you
- MONGO, I hadn't even had lunch yet. Come on man. Drmies (talk) 17:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- A boilermaker first thing in the morning will put hair on your back and men and women alike want that. Fact!--MONGO 17:24, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- Looks like a good way to check for reptilians as well! Never trust the hairless. I saw the original documentary on that. Don't forget the UN. --DHeyward (talk) 20:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- A boilermaker first thing in the morning will put hair on your back and men and women alike want that. Fact!--MONGO 17:24, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Really?
I'm not in the mood to get in an edit war with an admin in an area like American politics. But reverting to the last stable version is how WP:BOLD works. And that's what I did. You should be the one getting consensus for your changes, not the other way around. Hobit (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Note
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.