Misplaced Pages

User talk:Technophant: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:42, 3 August 2014 editTechnophant (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers4,780 edits →Request for arbitration: must edit because I can't fix redirects :-(← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:33, 28 November 2023 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,139,118 edits →ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
(986 intermediate revisions by 86 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''I am semi-active, response time may be days to weeks.
{{blocked user|by=]}}
'''
<!-- start of personal message-->
==MfD nomination of ]==
{{Template:User warning-mentalhealth}}
] ], a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 17:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
{{Template:User health inactive}}
{{ archive box|box-width=350px| ], ], {{User WikiProject Iraq 2}} }} :I was too late on to vote, however I marked it as inactive and I'm fine with deletion. ] (]) 18:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2019 election voter message ==


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
Welcome to my talk page! Please remember to remain ]. Users who wish to insult, harass or battleground may be asked not to edit on my talk page as per ] guidelines. Due to personal issues, there may unanticipated periods of little or no editing or monitoring. If there's an urgent issue you can email me or Thank one of my edit to trigger an alert.
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2019|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I'm also working on a laptop with a broken screen on an obsolete external monitor and '''slow internet'''. If it seems like I'm not willing to read things properly it is more likely an issue of inability to do so and not unwillingness.


If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
If you want to know more (out of concern only) I'm willing to talk about it off-wiki. - ] (]) 02:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
</td></tr>
<!-- end, please do not edit above this line.-->
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019/Coordination/MMS/04&oldid=926750357 -->


== Response about Clampi on the Cleanup project page ==
Hey Technophant, have you seen my response? Kind regards from ] (]) 12:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message ==
== Unblocked!! ==
{{unblock reviewed
|accept=Per modified topic ban language below: "Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban will result in blocks, except where excepted by ]. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator before the edit is made."&mdash;](]) 14:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
|1=


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
While planning my ] attempt I carefully read and re-read the guideline. I recognized that at some time I would want to return to acupuncture after a reliable source for my proposed edits were found. Herein I came to a dilemma, which account should I use or should I do it at all? The guideline seems to give conflicting advice and I was confuzled.
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2020|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Long story short I should have have asked first. Moving forward I will intend to spirit of the advice and completely avoid all past contentious, difficult, stressful areas. This will involve staying away from alt-med/complimentary medicine article, MEDR discussion/talk or discussion elsewhere, WP:MED, policy/guideline discussions with the exception of Clean Start which I wish to help improve. For the next 30 days I will stick to the two editing only the two projects listed on my talk page which have been problem-free and resist not be afraid to ask for advice first at appropriate forum if I think there will be an issue. I'm not sure what else I can say to help ensure that block is in fact not necessary to prevent damage or disruption I think I've learning quite a bit from being blocked and will never take my editing privileges or my fellow editors for granted again. - ] (]) 05:03, 26 July 2014 (UTC)}}


If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
:I am inclined to grant this unblock request. I'd like to hear from {{u|Kww}} first though. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:13, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
</td></tr>
::I'd like to see the discussion at ] complete first. I'm concerned that Technophant will believe that he only has to follow his suggested new wording.&mdash;](]) 05:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
</table>
:::I submitted a version that is acceptable to me. Adj is indef. away on family emergency. His last edit was on my page. If he were available then this issue would have been resolved by now. Even though I think Adj made a hasty decision I appreciate how he has gone out of his way to try to work with me and seems to want to make his work out right. I respect him for this and from what I've read of he has said about this case I think him and I are going to get along just fine so I don't see how you can justifiy keeping me locked up any longer. I've been civil and willing to work with everybody who's came here. - ] (]) 06:34, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2020/Coordination/MMS/04&oldid=990308269 -->
*Having followed this a little, I think the whole thing has mainly been a result of confusion and frustration. Technophant's unblock request looks good to me and I can't really see what more he can be expected to say. I would certainly support an unblock now. — Alan / ] (]) 11:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
*Thanks Kww for getting the unblock request. The wording was good by me as well. Mentioning BANEX is fine, but unnecessary...it would have applied anyway...but PLEASE don't try to edit the pages under the exceptions listed there! It will only cause trouble, as definitions of vandalism vary from user to user. It would be much much better to just unwatchlist everything, especially since there seem to be a number of people who would like to see you blocked, and who will probably watch for an excuse to report a violation. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 14:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::Like I explained below, after Dkriegls posted the wp:profinge link, I gave it a quick look and then made the comment that got me blocked. This is actually what happened. I had already unwatched all the topic related pages. That page was never on my watchlist because as I stated I had never visited it. Now, I'm eager to get off my talk page and get back to work. - ] (]) 04:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


==Rewording of topic ban== == NSFW ==
It seems like it would be a good idea to visit the wording of your topic ban, since there seems to have been confusion on this point. The original wording said "articles and pages" which is more narrow than the community's norms for topic bans. I apologize for the trouble and confusion that has caused you. Here is a wording that more accurately reflects how topic bans are interpreted: <blockquote>Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban will result in blocks. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator ''before'' the edit is made.</blockquote> Thus, an acupuncture related edit to a non-alt-med-related page would still be a violation of the topic ban. Basically, we want you to leave the subject area alone entirely. (User:Dennis Brown said as much in his comment .) Does that make sense? Once you confirm you understand and agree to a revised wording, and after concerns about your alternate account have been resolved (you need to pick ''one account'' and use it exclusively!) I plan on unblocking you, since the edits you made yesterday (with the exception of the one you said you made accidentally to Talk:Acupuncture) were at best borderline violations of the original wording. I will await the comments of you and other interested parties on the revised wording. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 15:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:I think your original wording is less ambiguous than you do. If you want to be more precise, I would change "specifically" to "including" in your description above.&mdash;](]) 16:25, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::@{{u|Adjwilley}}, I think that's a better edit, however I would like to bring this to the table: "Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Violations of this ban may result in blocks. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Alternative medicine can be defined by reliable sources secondary sources such as ] and the . Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator before the edit is made."
:::This revision is instead of being more ''restrictive'' it is instead more ''informative'' and will be less discouraging to ] while being more clear and less intimidating. I'm gathering that you want to put together a better way of topic banning disruptive users in the future and I'm willing to assist in this effort. I suggest putting together a guideline (ie WP:WHATISCAM) that clearly and unambiguously defines which topics are alternative medicine, which topics are complimentary medicine, and which topics can be construed to be ]. - ] (]) 00:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::Since that source defines "complementary" medicine as an approach that combined alternative and traditional medicine, it comes under your topic ban. You've also attempted to remove the "broadly construed" language. I think you miss the point. The point is to prevent you from making any edit which relates in any way to alternative medicine, any edit to our policies and guidelines on alternative medicine, or discussing anything, anywhere, that could possibly be construed as related to alternative medicine or our policies and guidelines related to alternative medicine. Your suggested rewording does not accomplish that.&mdash;](]) 04:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::] Isn't there already categories containing articles that considered to be alt-med? Let's drop my wording if you really bother you, but I didn't find anything that was reliably accurate. The problem b4 was I was getting warned for even mentioning the topic ban. If I can't even talk about the topic ban with an admin or another user (in a non pushing sort of way of course) then I that would be intolerable. (Try to imagine the same kind of thing be put upon yourelf). If there is I'll go by that list as an exclude list. I also can live with broadly construed with this important (to me) wording: <blockquote>Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban will result in blocks, except where excepted by WP:BANEX. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator ''before'' the edit is made.</blockquote> - ] (]) 06:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::In my haste to get a 'version out the door' I forgot to include the minor wording change "Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban can result in blocks, except where specifically excepted by WP:BANEX. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator ''before'' the edit is made." I see that this will prohibit me from doing certain things I used to be able to do without and controversy cuh any semi-automated editing such as Huggle vandalism patrolling or using a Bot to edit lists of categories. - ] (]) 08:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


Just a quick note, as I saw your edit on the Death of Darren Rainey page:
== And again .... ==
There is no NSFW on Misplaced Pages; it is uncensored and for educational purposes.
===Blocked again===
See ]


Happy editing! ] (]) 01:59, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' '''indefinitely''' from editing for using IPs to evade topic ban. ] clearly indicates a San Antonio residence, so there doesn't seem to be much doubt about the identity of {{ipvandal|71.40.3.92}} or {{ipvandal|75.92.62.0}}. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by adding the following text below this notice: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;''}}. However, you should read the ] first. </div><!-- Template:uw-block -->&mdash;](]) 05:42, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message ==
{{unblock reviewed | 1=Talk about clear abuse of admin tools! "Requests for unblock in the event of a case of mistaken identity, misunderstanding, or other '''irregularity'''" Users have a right to talk about policies or practices they don't like. This in NO WAY disrupts Misplaced Pages, either in the main space, main talk space, Project space, or Project talk space. If you don't like a particular editor's point of view then unwatch their page. My edits had nothing to do with the topic ban. There is no policy against editing while logged out and it isn't is violation of the topic ban.This is , and censorship of freedom of protected speech. - ] (]) 05:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC) | decline = I'm sorry but you dug this hole by yourself. I highly recommend that you take at least a week off and then read ] before attempting another unblock request. Any request that doesn't specifically address the issue of logging out to participate in a thread about MEDRS (thereby evading your topic ban) is going to be declined, and repeated bad unblock requests will eventually result in talk page access being removed entirely. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 17:04, 27 July 2014 (UTC)}}


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
:No, you have been blocked for using IPs to evade your topic ban. Participating in a discussion about how to "overthrow the stranglehold of of MEDRS" is clearly a violation of your topic ban, and doing so as an IP shows that you knew it was a violation while you were doing it.&mdash;](]) 06:03, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
::Take a look at civility thread above. The diff you cite are exactly the contribs in question. Doc James replied "Yes I agree that he can have another chance. Hopefully things will be productive going forwards." To all of sudden go against his opinion (and your own!) shows ignorance (or malice). I HATE IT when admins log out to add in opinions that they don't want to take responsibility for. I that's the first I've done such a thing. You're accusing me of something (being deceptive/socking) with no proof. End this silliness. - ] (]) 06:21, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::*Except that occurred after the discussion you are pointing to.&mdash;](]) 14:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::Have you ever heard of ]? It means "The law does not concern itself with trifles." It is actually a guideline on Commons -]. Where's your sense of humor? - ] (]) 19:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::::I have none when it comes to socking and ban evasion, nor do I think you were making an effort at humor. It's apparent to me that you have no intent of actually abiding by your topic ban.&mdash;](]) 19:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
{{u|Adjwilley}} {{u|Jmh649}} Please take look at this. This isn't either fair or justified. I just got back from a long block (and the emergency room) and I was just about to take a look at my watchlist for the first time in days and start patrolling my project pages for the first time now this. - ] (]) 06:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)</small>
{{Ping|Jéské Couriano}} Please take a look and give your thoughts on this. ] (]) 07:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
</td></tr>
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2021/Coordination/MM/04&oldid=1056563273 -->


== ''The WikiEagle'' - January 2022 ==
:Users have a right to talk about policies or practices they don't like. This in NO WAY disrupts Misplaced Pages, either in the main space, main talk space, Project space, or Project talk space. If you don't like a particular editor's point of view then unwatch their page. My edits had nothing to do with the topic ban. This is retaliatory, and censorship of freedom of opinion. That it isn't is violation of the talk ban. - ] (]) 19:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::Just as a point of fact, users actually have no rights at all on Misplaced Pages - there's certainly no "right to talk about policies and practices" that would override a topic ban. — Alan / ] (]) 10:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::@{{u|Boing! said Zebedee}} You say this give no PAG to support to your opinion. Take a look at: and my Resignation essay below. Please talk to Gayle Karen Young and ask her opinion. - ] (]) 19:38, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::::If you actually think that document vindicates you in some way, then your reading comprehension problems are even more serious than they seemed. The only way forward is to own up to ban evasion by IP editing and to make a commitment to not do this in the future. Continued talk page rambling will only get your talk page access revoked.--] (]) 20:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::I did it. I did not deny it, I did it. It was stupid, silly, and childish. I knew the policies (or thought I did) and I'm clear on them now. I will refrain from further IP edits. Promise. - ] (]) 20:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


{{unblock|reason=I do not deny it, I did it. It was stupid, silly, and immature. I knew the policies (or thought I did) and I'm clear on them now. I have refrained from further IP edits. I will respect the topic ban. I will work within the system. I did notify a CheckUser regarding my alternate account. I have made no other IP edits. Please contact a CheckUser to get rid of lingering suspicions. I do not pose a threat or disruption to Misplaced Pages and can not see any reason to confine being blocked. - ] (]) 21:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)}}
:I'm still listening. Not quite ''believing'' at this point, but listening. The last time I unblocked you, you said you were going to abide by the terms of your topic ban. You a mere fourteen hours later. Above, you explicitly said that you had not violated your topic ban, and have repeatedly hurled accusations at me, trying to make it appear that I was being dishonest when, in fact, you going back on your word to honor your topic ban. So, tell me: what's changed? What should make me believe that you are being honest at this point?&mdash;](]) 03:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


{|width=100% style="border:2px solid #87CEEB; color:black; background-color:#F0FFFF;"
::I am not nor have I ever been a ]. As a former member of the Vandal Patrol, I have encountered, reverted, and suggested blocks on multiple users and sock-puppets trying to push fringe theories. I do not deny being strongly opinionated, nor do I suggest that have always been the right in all situations. Just recently, I have identified, removed, and flagged a statement that at first glance seemed to be validly sourced but was questionable and posted this thread ] to warn other editor that this material is questionable and should not be included without further investigation.
|]
|-
|style="padding:0px 2em; font-size:42px; text-align:center; font-family:Times New Roman;"|The WikiEagle
|-
|style="text-align:center;"|The ] Newsletter
|}
{|{{#ifeq:{{ROOTPAGENAME}}|WikiProject Aviation||class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"}} border=1 width=100% style="border:2px solid SkyBlue; border-collapse:collapse; background-color:#white;"
!colspan=2 style="color:black; background-color:#87CEEB; padding:5px;"|Volume I &#8212; Issue 1
|-
|colspan=2 style="text-align:center; padding:5px;"|]{{•}}]{{•}}]{{•}}]{{•}}]{{•}}]
|-
|colspan=2 style="padding:5px; vertical-align:top;"|<span style="font-size:22px;">'''''Announcements'''''</span>
----
*After over a decade of silence, the WikiProject Aviation newsletter is making a comeback under the name ''The WikiEagle''. This first issue was sent to all active members of the project and its ]. If you wish to continue receiving ''The WikiEagle'', you can add your username to the ]. For now the newsletter only covers general project news and is run by only one editor. If you wish to help or to become a columnist, please ]. If you have an idea which you believe would improve the newsletter, please share it; suggestions are welcome and encouraged.
*On 16 December, ] which determined ''theaerodrome.com'' to be an unreliable source. The website, which is , mainly on WWI aviation, as of the publishing of this issue.
*''Luft46.com'' has been added to the ] after ].
*The ] article was ''']''' to ''Featured Article'' status on 26 December after being nominated by {{Noping|Hawkeye7}}.
*The ] article was ''']''' to ''Good Article'' status on 4 December after being nominated by {{Noping|Zawed}}.
*The ] article was ''']''' to ''Good Article'' status on 22 December after being nominated by {{Noping|Amitchell125}}.
*The ] article was ''']''' to ''Good Article'' status on 26 December after being nominated by {{Noping|Zawed}}.


|-
::I created the page ] after getting consensus to do so on the , and almost two years the page stood unchallenged unedited until it gained the notice of the "fringe" crowd which attacked and deleted it. There has been a significant change in climate and a false sense of consensus by means of ]ing and any editor who tries in good faith to make an edit that contradicts the skeptic POV. I find all of this disturbing and disgusting and hope that neutrality is once again restored, however I do not personally wish to be participate in this battleground any longer.
|style="padding:5px; vertical-align:top;"|<span style="font-size:22px;">'''Members'''</span>
----
'''New Members'''
*{{Noping|KingAviationKid}} (Joined on 17 December)
*{{Noping|PatrickChiao}} (Joined on 22 December)
*{{Noping|Wp9097}} (Joined on 16 December)
{{columns-list|colwidth=15em|Number of active members: 386.
Total number of members: 921.}}
----
<span style="font-size:22px;">'''Closed Discussions'''</span>
----
] '''Featured Article assessment'''
*] (]) – Closed as '''promoted''' on 26 December 2021


] '''Good Article assessment'''
::I have made every effort to be civil and have until recently tried to ignore the personal attacks and other attacks on my credibility, however some users have gone too far. ]'s repeated attacks on me, concluding this statement "] if they stopped editing" in this is more just a series of personal attacks, it's a ] ("]" = "somebody should kill him" = '''murder'''] which should result in a swift punitive action. {{quote|Death threats and issues of similar severity may result in a block without warning.}}
*] (]) – Closed as '''not promoted''' on 30 December 2021
::I can come up with a dozen other examples where this user has attacked, threatened, or insulted me, including attacking me for my recent, and temporary insanity brought about by an unfortunate drug interaction. WP needs to be a safe place to share. I have no clue as to why his disruptions are tolerated. I also can not find a ] as to why I am repeatedly blocked (and even having my talk page privileges being threatened) for the smallest infractions to a (short) topic ban which I voluntarily agreed to. It seem that civility, AGF, and sanity have all been pushed aside in favor of further battleground attacks. I want to call a truce and an end to all this chicanery. I've been honest to a fault regarding my situation, I feel that I deserve to be treated fairly. - ] (]) 09:47, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
*] (]) – Closed as '''promoted''' on 26 December 2021
*] (]) – Closed as '''promoted''' on 22 December 2021
*] (]) – Closed as '''promoted''' on 4 December 2021


] '''Deletion'''
==File:Mapping Iraq ~ June 15th 2014.png==
*] (]) – Closed as '''delete and redirect''' on 30 December 2021
Hi, thank for your map. Can you please upload a more clear and update map. Unfortunately, it is difficult to read the names of the cities in the current map.--<font face="monospace">](]-])</font> 04:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
*] (]) – Closed as '''keep''' on 25 December 2021
:It's available in a 2000px format by clicking on the largest format . After it loads you may need to click on it to enlarge it. The map maker has promised to update it every to weeks, so if he does it will be at the end of the month. - ] (]) 09:44, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Thank you.--<font face="monospace">](]-])</font> 10:40, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
::::Can I put in a plea? A reader with no knowledge of the area can't tell where the country boundaries are, which is Syria and which is Iraq. Given that land control is such an issue in this conflict, wouldn't it be a good idea to delineate them? --] (]) 15:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::It's not my map. Find the author on twitter and ask. - ] (]) 17:23, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::I didn't think it was your map; I was just hoping you could perhaps pass the message on. :( I have mentioned this on the ISIS Talk page before but there was no response. I wouldn't know where to begin to find out who created this map and unfortunately don't know how to use Twitter! --] (]) 11:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


] '''Requested moves'''
{{od}}@], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ]. I pinged all you to come here and take a look at this because of your expressed interest in ISIS/Iraq/Syria maps and/or territory. Right now I'm blocked (see ]) and my editing is restricted to my Talk page:
*] → ] (]) – Closed as '''moved''' on 30 December 2021
*] → ] (]) – Closed as '''moved''' on 30 December 2021
*] → ] (]) – '''Withdrawn''' on 28 December 2021


|width=50% style="padding:5px; vertical-align:top;"|<span style="font-size:22px;">'''Article Statistics'''</span><br/><span style="font-size:12px;">This data reflects values from DMY.</span>
If you follow Thomas van Linge () on Twitter he tweets about the posts on Pieter Van Ostaeyen's () arabism . Pieter also the site http://syria.herokuapp.com/ where he has a chart of daily deaths in Syria (not a reliable source but interesting none the less). On the of Pieter's blog he has been publishing maps of Syria and Iraq and updating them on a bi-weekly basis.
----
{| class="ratingstable wikitable plainlinks" style="text-align: right;"
|-
! colspan="3" class="ratingstabletitle" | Aviation pages by quality
|-
! rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: bottom" | '''Quality'''


|-
Here's the latest maps : and . Because these are self-made maps and not explicitly made from a reliable source like our currently used ones, we could put up links on the talk page but would need to discuss further if they are suitable for inclusion in the article. I only got permission to use one Iraq map (older one above) but not unrestricted permission to upload and release all newer maps. I don't think he would mind; there's no specific copyright notice however that's not enough because . I'm a late-comer to Twitter, however it's easy to use, P123ct1. It is certainly easier than learning to edit Misplaced Pages - with all the wikimarkup code and the word-salad of innumerable polices and guidelines (]) and ]. I've been following the ] project pages some. Looks like things are going well. I hope to be back soon! - ] (]) 15:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
! style="text-align: center;" | '''Total'''
|-
| {{FA-Class|category=Category:FA-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{FL-Class|category=Category:FL-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{A-Class|category=Category:A-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{GA-Class|category=Category:GA-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{B-Class|category=Category:B-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{C-Class|category=Category:C-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Start-Class|category=Category:Start-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Stub-Class|category=Category:Stub-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{List-Class|category=Category:List-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Category-Class|category=Category:Category-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Disambig-Class|category=Category:Disambig-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{File-Class|category=Category:File-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Portal-Class|category=Category:Portal-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Project-Class|category=Category:Project-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Redirect-Class|category=Category:Redirect-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Template-Class|category=Category:Template-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{NA-Class|category=Category:NA-Class_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Assessed-Class}}
|| ''''''
|-
| {{Unassessed-Class|category=Category:Unassessed_aviation_articles}}
|| ''''''
|-
| style="text-align: center;" | '''Total'''
|| ''''''
|-
{{User:WP 1.0 bot/WikiWork|project=Aviation|export=table}}
|-
|}
|-
|colspan=2 style="padding:5px; vertical-align:top;"|<span style="font-size:22px;">'''New/Ongoing Discussions'''</span>
----
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}


] '''Featured Article review'''
==Sound clip in ]==
*''']''' (]) – Since 14 December 2021


] '''A-class Article assessment'''
Hello, there. I don't know if you're aware, but the clip doesn't work with Internet Explorer 11, though it works perfectly with Firefox. Just thought I'd mention it. :) --] (]) 15:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
*] (]) – Since 21 April 2020
:@], If you go to look at http://www.xiph.org/dshow/ you should be able to download the ogg codec. If you need more help go to https://commons.wikimedia.org/Commons:Media_help - ] (]) 15:40, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
*] (]) – Since 22 February 2010
::Thanks, though I was thinking more of the general reader. But perhaps most people with IE11 already have the right kind of software to hear the clip. --] (]) 15:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
:::I can't do much about it. Ogg is the only format commons allows. - ] (]) 15:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)


] '''Good Article assessment'''
== Note about edit warring ==
*''']''' (]) – Since 25 December 2021
*] (]) – Since 2 October 2021


] '''Merger proposals'''
Based on what I've seen of your recent actions, it appears that you don't understand what edit warring is because you keep doing it. I highly recommend that you read the links in the templates above, since you have had two edit warring reports filed against you in the past couple of days. (Note in particular that 3RR doesn't mean that you don't get 3 reverts for free...I have seen editors blocked for as little as 1 revert.) Anyway, now that you've been around the block twice, the admins at the edit warring noticeboard are probably going to be giving you much less leeway. Other essays I hope you'll read are ] and ], which you often appear to be on the wrong side of. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 16:17, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
*] → ] (]) – Since 10 August 2021
:got it - ] (]) 16:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
*] → ] (]) – Since 10 August 2021
*] → ] (]) – Since 10 August 2021
*] → ] (]) – Since 23 June 2021
*] → ] (]) – Since 30 May 2021
*] → ] (]) – Since 29 May 2021
*] → ] (]) – Since 28 May 2021


] '''Splitting proposals'''
== Topic ban from Alternative Medicine ==
*] (]) – Since 23 November 2021
*] (]) – Since 24 September 2021
*] (]) – Since 16 August 2021
*] (]) – Since 8 September 2019


{{Col-2}}
Per discussion at AN/I, you are indefinitely topic banned from all articles and talk pages related to ] and/or ], broadly construed. Any violations of this ban will result in blocks. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. If you have any questions about the ban, please ask me or another administrator for clarification. (This ban has also been listed at ].) <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 21:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
] '''Deletion'''
*''']''' (]) – Since 29 December 2021


] '''Requested moves'''
I don't understand, why would they ban someone from talking about alternative medicine? Did I understand correctly that this is why you are considering retirement? As a daily user of Misplaced Pages, I'm asking you to reconsider. The work you have done here is invaluable, please stick around, and don't let the A-holes win!! Peace and love! YS ] (]) 21:52, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 30 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 28 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 28 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 28 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 28 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 28 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 27 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 26 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 25 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 13 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 13 December 2021
*'''] → ]''' (]) – Since 13 December 2021


] '''Did you know'''
*{{u|Adjwilley}}&{{u|Kww}}- I took a look and can't find a template:TopBan or anything of that sort. Wouldn't it nice to have one? Where can a find the wording of the updated version? - ] (]) 04:47, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*''']''' (]) – Since 30 December 2021
::Ok, I see it. It's in the unblock reason. I'll keep the template up on my talk page. - ] (]) 05:10, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*''']''' (]) – Since 26 December 2021

*''']''' (]) – Since 6 December 2021
== ] ==
*''']''' (]) – Since 3 December 2021

{{Col-end}}
I came here to give you a heads up, but after looking at your comment page I feel like it might just feel like piling on. So first some encouragement. I got all types of knocked around when I first started editing here years ago. I got angry, frustrated, and almost gave up. We often get motivated to edit pages we care deeply about. And without understanding Misplaced Pages culture, we get frustrated. But that is not all that this encyclopedia is about. We use it to research so much more. I encourage you to take some time and edit articles that aren't nearly as debated as Acupuncture. It will help you learn the ways of Misplaced Pages, reduce your frustration, and help you get some positive editing under your belt. Many Misplaced Pages policies are only learned after you violate them. If you are already frustrated and emotionally involved when an editor points out your violation, it rarely becomes a lesson learned and instead feels more like piling on punishment.
----

<span style="font-size:22px;">'''On The Main Page'''</span>
So for instance, a minor little rule that you in know way could have known until you broke it is ]. encouraging LesVegas to join the RFC could have been less biased. It's okay to ask friendly editors to come join a discussion about you, but it is discouraged to try and bias them prior by calling your fellow editors "hardened core of skeptics that just don't want things to change". Now I'm the type who likes to let new editors know about stuff like this, but if you are in a heated debate with some editors, they will interpret this as bad faith and assume you are only here to push your agenda. The best way to learn this stuff is to edit "easy" articles where the information isn't likely to be debated and is easily sourced. Then when you get knowledgeable about policy, you move back to the issue the got you editing in the first place. I hope this serves as a bit of encouragement, even though it came from a friendly skeptic ;) --<span style="font-family:Georgia;">]</span> <span style="font-family:Verdana;">(])</span> 20:36, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
----
===response===
'''Did you know...'''
:Some ppl need to let things go. Misplaced Pages has changed a lot. I got interested in editing again recently when the ISIS crisis broke. I became the number 2 contributor with only one deleted edit and nothing but warm, friendly relations with other editors. However, There's something wrong with sceptic scene. It seems to attract sadists. I do think its best to avoid that whole thing. - ] (]) 02:15, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
*... that the ] demonstration aircraft used by ''']''' is also used in military operations of the ]? ''(24 December)''
::I think it's more that skeptics tend to patrol the most contentions pages. Trust me though, I have found uncompromising editors creating frustration at the most obscure pages, over the most asinine details. After a while I ask myself if it was even worth it to engage said person. I am glad you have found a positive editing experience. Feel free to ask me any policy questions that you find yourself getting frustrated with. Always happy to help. <span style="font-family:Georgia;">]</span> <span style="font-family:Verdana;">(])</span> 04:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
:::@], here's my theory. Promoters of unorthodox ideologies (theories) of course like, believe and strongly feel their theories. Likewise promoters of skeptic ideologies (theories) like, believe and strongly feel their theories. The '''difference''' between the two is that the former have very specific beliefs while the latter have much more generalized (broader) beliefs. The premise of WP's consensus philosophy '''requires''' adequate representation of the whole spectrum of beliefs. It works, usually. However in the case of alt vs. skepticism, the skeptics will almost always pervade. Skeptic debunkers get a ] (high) from being right (debunking) ''any'' "fringe" theory, however owners of minority orthodox theories only get a get a bump from supporting ''their specific theories''. Hence the problem in alt vs. skepticism debates. - ] (]) 01:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::::I think you are spot on about the emotional commitment to the argument (on both sides). But I think a lot of frustration stems not because "the skeptics will almost always pervade" but because ] puts the burden of proof on the fringe theory, thus allowing less civil skeptics to dismiss it out of hand. Skeptics also jump from debate to debate (fine tuning their knowledge of Misplaced Pages debates) while fringe theorists often have one or two theories they try to promote, thus limiting themselves to the finer points of Misplaced Pages policy debates. That's why I always encourage the frustrated to spend more time working on other Misplaced Pages articles. It took me a long time to learn how this whole community works, and I am still learning new tricks of the trade all the time. --<span style="font-family:Georgia;">]</span> <span style="font-family:Verdana;">(])</span> 03:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::{{u|Dkriegls}} FYI, after you posted this I clicked on the profinge link, gave it a quick look and then made the comment that got me blocked. For all those who think I was, well whatever, this is actually what happened. (sigh) - ] (]) 04:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Technophant, regarding edits - you made those edits to an archived noticeboard discussion. Do not modify the contents of an archive page. It says right at the top, '''Do not edit the contents of this page.'''<p>Regarding your recent edits and , you make reference to a subject area in your topic ban. These edits are ill-advised, you really must not be making any kind of reference to that subject area at all. I am pinging {{u|Adjwilley}} here to review those edits and possibly comment or take action. It is normal for someone newly under a sanction to test the limits of that sanction, but you need to know that this testing period is now over, and you really must stay away from the subject area completely. Any kind of reference to it, no matter if oblique or sly (referring to the last two diffs), can very easily result in further sanctions. <code>]]</code> 03:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

==Edit refraction, disruptive editing by ] ("Brangifer") ==
In the past week this user has made personal attacks, given me false/incorrect information regarding PAN on talk pages, threatened me with blocks/bans numerous times. However in this edit on my old account, he not only is he only - he also removed my Inactive template. Due to his bull-headed nature, and complete unwillingness to compromise or act in good faith I am hereby blocking him from editing my talk pages. I would like to ask an uninvolved editor to please restore my talkpage template. I said I will not use that account again and I will not allow this user to be a ] to me any longer. - ] (]) 13:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
: Sorry about that. That was an unintended deletion and I have restored the template. -- ] (]) 15:16, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

::BullRangifer, despite my being clearly and unambiguously being told (before the block and without any community objection) that you are not to write on my talk page you have twice thought that your unapologetic actions (and above does not count as apology for your personal attacks etc.) can just be allowed because??? If this user wants to have his views represented here he MUST either get another user (except Quack Guru who has also be disallowed) to represent his views instead. This is topic-wide sanity check and I am not simply trying to block him for expressing a viewpoint. - ] (]) 07:34, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
{{od}}{{u|BullRangifer}}, thank you for respecting my wishes. I would prefer to archive my userpage but it is impossible to create an archive while being restricted to only this talk page. You can reply to this message here. - ] (]) 21:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
: I would be very happy to help create an archive for you and proceed to archive some of your stuff. I can recover stuff from the history so the archived material is complete. Is that okay? -- ] (]) 23:28, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::], (if you don't me calling you that), you can go ahead and take all my diffs marked "cleanup" and move them to an archive page. I would appreciate it if you set up Mizabot as well. Thx. - ] (]) 02:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::: Since my username has to do with extremely peaceful reindeer, not pitbulls, I'd rather you just call me Brangifer or BullRangifer. I'm a "bull rangifer", IOW a bull reindeer/caribou. I've shot 16 of them in Greenland. You can read my article about ] if you want to learn more about that subject.
::: I'll start the archiving, but someone else will have to do the Mizabot part, since I've never done it. - ] (]) 04:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::: Okay, I've archived that material. There was a lot of it! It won't likely be an exact picture of your page from before the last date on the last post in that archive, but I don't see any way to do that now, simply because what you deleted was selectively chosen from in the middle of lots of other content.
:::: In the future, if you'll just identify, from top to bottom, the lowest section where there hasn't been any activity above that point for some time, and then archive everything above that point (empty it all above that point), you'll end up with an archive that essentially recreates what's happened on your talk page. That's the general idea with an archive. Just keep whatever headings you wish to always have at the top.
:::: Just add new material to the bottom of the archive. When it gets too long, start a new one, using the same URL format and header code. The Mizabot part is something I can't do, so you'll need to ask someone else. Good luck! -- ] (]) 05:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::@] (]) Thanks. There is a lot, almost all from this month. I have trouble with learning new names, can I call you Bullranger? That won't be confusing to other editors and doesn't seem offensive. If you would take a look at you'll see all my contribs from account start to the end of June. It doesn't take much to see I'm a productive editor with a wide varieties of interests with a focus on the Middle East. No edit wars, no conflicts, no diva statements, just productive edits. I wish the last two weeks would just go away so I can go back to doing what I enjoy, contributing. - ] (]) 06:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
{{Olive branch|2=Best wishes|1=I hope that after some time your block is lifted and you can resume pleasurable constructive participation. I think some good advice has been given and if followed you will find yourself once again a welcome member of the community. The events of the last two weeks are likely to fade into obscurity (I'd be cautious as sometimes things re-emerge). I'd like to think the community has some understanding that we all have rough periods. I'd like to express my regret that your experience has been so rough, editing Misplaced Pages is supposed to be ]. Best wishes. - - ] (]) 06:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)}}

:Thank you "oh no it's ]" (lulz from ]). In this restricted state I can't even use the Thank feature. :-{ If you take a look a what I posted above, my contrib history from you'll see nothing but solid editing, no drama. The problems started 16 July (right before this episode started) when a doctor mistakenly gave me a ] steroid shot in my wrist even though I had it in my chart that I'm allergic to it. That drug is notorious for causing agitation, paranoia, insomnia, aggression, obsessive hyperactive behavior in around 15% of patients.<!--I heard a story of a man who was happily married who got a steriod shot and ending up killing his wife!--> I emailed ] because of his medical background I thought he'd understand.
:Decadron's bad news, and it's long lasting. In the past reactions from Decadron have caused me to lose a job, fights with family, getting in conflicts with friends and roommates causing me to get kicked out an more. Unf. it's long lasting and there's no antidote. As on doctor told me "you can't un-inject the drug, you just have to wait it out." From the medical literature and past experience it takes around a month for it wear off, so I'm going to apologize both for my past actions and potential future ones. I see two options here, either we wait until August 16th to unblock me, or we come to a consensus that even a mentally disturbed editor can still be productive even though he isn't quite right in the head. I prefer the later. While there's perhaps 100,000 active editors, there's only 6k roll-backers like myself and perhaps even fewer with the editing experience and Wikimarkup experience I have. Yes, there's others that can do these things but the lose of any experienced edit is a loss to the whole project as a whole, a lose that should be avoided if at all possible.
:In summary, we all go through episodes, some more than other. I think what's important is who we are inside, not the sum of our mistakes. Cam you agree with me on this?? - ] (]) 07:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::First, I don't assess whats important about people. I just do my best to get along with them. Second, I am sorry if you have had a bad experience with a medication. I hope all is (or is soon) well. Third, I will take no position on your blocking/unblocking I leave that to administrators. I would guess your block will be lifted at some time. Finally, I'm not sure why you would want to resume editing when not able and ready to act responsibly. It is really not my business though. I wish you well and hope at some time you return to the project fruitfully and happily. Best. - - ] (]) 08:06, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::Wish you well and hope you are better soon. ] (] · ] · ]) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 20:42, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

==Recent Accomplishments==
I am one of the top contributors to the controversial militant group ] (ISIS) and its leader ]. Since I started editing the page in on June 15th I've had nothing but positive experiences with the other contributors to the article with zero edit wars or other conflicts.

I've also been diligent in trying to prevent potentially unreliable information such as fake Snowden leaks from getting included in the discussion as seen here: ] - ] (]) 15:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar'''
|- |-
|colspan=2 style="padding:5px; font-size:12px;"|
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I hope this bit of encouragement makes you feel less unnoticed for your recent constructive edits --<span style="font-family:Georgia;">]</span> <span style="font-family:Verdana;">(])</span> 04:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Discuss & propose changes to ''The WikiEagle'' at ''']''' page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the ''']'''.<br/>
Newsletter contributor: {{Noping|ZLEA}}
|} |}
] (]) 16:37, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:ZLEA@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Aviation/WikiEagle/Subscribe&oldid=1063162664 -->


== ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message ==
==Rewording of topic ban==
It seems like it would be a good idea to visit the wording of your topic ban, since there seems to have been confusion on this point. The original wording said "articles and pages" which is more narrow than the community's norms for topic bans. I apologize for the trouble and confusion that has caused you. Here is a wording that more accurately reflects how topic bans are interpreted: <blockquote>Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban will result in blocks. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator ''before'' the edit is made.</blockquote> Thus, an acupuncture related edit to a non-alt-med-related page would still be a violation of the topic ban. Basically, we want you to leave the subject area alone entirely. (User:Dennis Brown said as much in his comment .) Does that make sense? Once you confirm you understand and agree to a revised wording, and after concerns about your alternate account have been resolved (you need to pick ''one account'' and use it exclusively!) I plan on unblocking you, since the edits you made yesterday (with the exception of the one you said you made accidentally to Talk:Acupuncture) were at best borderline violations of the original wording. I will await the comments of you and other interested parties on the revised wording. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 15:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:I think your original wording is less ambiguous than you do. If you want to be more precise, I would change "specifically" to "including" in your description above.&mdash;](]) 16:25, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::@{{u|Adjwilley}}, I think that's a better edit, however I would like to bring this to the table: "Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Violations of this ban may result in blocks. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Alternative medicine can be defined by reliable sources secondary sources such as ] and the . Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator before the edit is made."
:::This revision is instead of being more ''restrictive'' it is instead more ''informative'' and will be less discouraging to ] while being more clear and less intimidating. I'm gathering that you want to put together a better way of topic banning disruptive users in the future and I'm willing to assist in this effort. I suggest putting together a guideline (ie WP:WHATISCAM) that clearly and unambiguously defines which topics are alternative medicine, which topics are complimentary medicine, and which topics can be construed to be ]. - ] (]) 00:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::Since that source defines "complementary" medicine as an approach that combined alternative and traditional medicine, it comes under your topic ban. You've also attempted to remove the "broadly construed" language. I think you miss the point. The point is to prevent you from making any edit which relates in any way to alternative medicine, any edit to our policies and guidelines on alternative medicine, or discussing anything, anywhere, that could possibly be construed as related to alternative medicine or our policies and guidelines related to alternative medicine. Your suggested rewording does not accomplish that.&mdash;](]) 04:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::] Isn't there already categories containing articles that considered to be alt-med? Let's drop my wording if you really bother you, but I didn't find anything that was reliably accurate. The problem b4 was I was getting warned for even mentioning the topic ban. If I can't even talk about the topic ban with an admin or another user (in a non pushing sort of way of course) then I that would be intolerable. (Try to imagine the same kind of thing be put upon yourelf). If there is I'll go by that list as an exclude list. I also can live with broadly construed with this important (to me) wording: <blockquote>Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban will result in blocks, except where excepted by WP:BANEX. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator ''before'' the edit is made.</blockquote> - ] (]) 06:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
{{od}}
In my haste to get a 'version out the door' I forgot to include the minor wording change "Per consensus at ANI, User:Technophant is indefinitely topic banned from all edits related to Alternative medicine, and specifically Acupuncture. Any violations of this ban can result in blocks, except where specifically excepted by WP:BANEX. The topic ban may be appealed in 1 year. Any questions about whether an edit will constitute a topic ban violation should be directed to an administrator ''before'' the edit is made." I see that this will prohibit me from doing certain things I used to be able to do without and controversy cuh any semi-automated editing such as Huggle vandalism patrolling or using a Bot to edit lists of categories. - ] (]) 08:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
==]==
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I now wish I had responded to your request for help with the Acupuncture article. It was not that I did not want to help, but rather that I know next to nothing about the subject and am heavily involved with ISIS and al-Baghdadi stuff (those b footnotes, which are nearly all incomplete, and some of them plain wrong), so did not respond. I was going to say then that I sympathize with you over the treatment you are getting on that subject, because it is my strong impression that Misplaced Pages is obstructive and difficult about so called "fringe" medicine and almost anything related to it. I wrote a long post some time back letting rip about this on Misplaced Pages but now cannot find it. It is not from personal experience, but what I sense others who try to edit on these subjects experience. Please do not give up. Your help and work on the ISIS and al-Baghdadi articles has been immense and valuable, to everyone, and you are vigilant, as I try to be as well. It is alarming how things can slip in unnoticed, which is why I always check the latest on the View History pages to see all is well (as far I can tell from my limited knowledge). I would not be surprised if your trouble stems from the subject rather than your editing. Now to what I really came here for:-


If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>
@{{u|Technophant}} You asked me some time ago about how notification of messages works now. This is the answer I have just had on the Village Pump Help desk to a query I had which I thought might help:-
:If a message is left on a general Talk page or Help desk for a particular user in this form, {{reply to|Username}}, is the user automatically alerted that they have a message? --] (]) 08:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::{{replyto|P123ct1}} Yes, provided that (a) the link to the user's home page (which might be in the form of a {{tlx|replyto}}) gets added in the same post that your signature was added and (b) at {{myprefs|Notifications}} they have "Mention" enabled (for either Web or Email); if it's enabled for web only, they also need to have "{{int:echo-pref-new-message-indicator}}" (on the same page) enabled. More at ]. --] (]) 09:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::One excellent way of getting a user's attention who may otherwise be swamped with mentions is to Thank them for one of their contribs. It builds good will and recognition and will stand out among the din.

I hope this ban is not universal. You would be sorely missed on the ISIS and al-Baghdadi pages. If there is anything I can do to help support you, please let me know. Keep your chin up! --] (]) 10:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:PS I will try to find my post on alternative medicine. I think Misplaced Pages are heavily biased against it, whatever they may say, which definitely flouts NPOV. --] (]) 10:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::Thanks, please do.] (]) 11:33, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:I'm not a lawyer, however I do have a knack for legal issues and did quite a bit of work on ] re constitutional and case law. If this were a case in a court of law it should be thrown out without prejudice, ie no finding of fault being issued on the plaintiff. If there's a miscarriage in justice, an appeal can be made an easily won, with possible findings of misconduct being filed to the witnesses who provided false depositions.
:The former result is obviously preferential. If the finding is a dismissal '''with''' prejudice there will be a mark in the public record that the block was warranted the patronizing and often inaccurate warnings will stain on my reputation forever. - ] (]) 11:30, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::Unfortunately, I don't think anyone would ever get anything better than ] from Misplaced Pages, with the all-powerful judges being the administrators. ''': (''' --] (]) 13:16, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::There seems to be an important and not readily transparent policy on how to bring up issues regarding reporting admins. I really do hope this block is resolved swiftly and fairly. It seems surreal... (:-X) - ] (]) 00:55, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

*Something or someone has altered what I said in my last post. I did not put "Nil desperandum" (in red), I put "palm tree justice"! I checked my post before sending it, too. I cannot understand it. I hope the block ends soon as well. Good luck. --] (]) 10:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::] That was my bad, copy-paste error. Fixed. BTW: simply putting putting in somebody's wikilinked user name of the template {{u|username}} will generate a notice. Adding the @ means that you want to address the comment specifically to that user. These new to me additions to the WP framework really do help make sure conversations are followed up upon. - ] (]) 04:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== Answering allegations of sockpuppetry, attempted outings, and the truth of why I hid my identity ==

While this is not explicitly a block due to socking, the innuendo is obvious. ] wrote that "I didn't see a voluntary coming clean in . Note that the relationship between Technophant and Stillwaterising was ''removed'', but both accounts were retained, in parallel, as members of the same Wikiproject. The edit he was blocked over was neither of the ones you mention, but . Note that the block is indefinite, not infinite. If he makes a reasonable unblock request and you think he will actually comply with his topic ban, I'm not going to whine if you grant it.&mdash;](]) 05:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)"

While this is technically true, the total time that "both accounts were retained, in parallel, as members of the same Wikiproject was a mere 105 minutes. During that time I was editing my userpages and planning my homecoming and made no edits in main space. You can see for yourself in the . No ill intent can be deferred from this. I was planning on deactivating this legally created and maintained alternate ''sum'' ] account and reactivating my original account. After my sudden unexpected ] I immediately acknowledged the topic ban and prematurely had to disclose myself. The reason for resigning from Misplaced Pages as Stillwaterising and deciding to convert my disused alternate account has to do with my involvement in bringing the Wikiporn scandal to the public's attention. This resulted in and a very serious legal threat accompanied by personal attack and attempted outing by a Wikimedia staff member.

(more) Instead of going to the board with this or the media I internalized it and told no-one. The fear, hatred, and resentment quickly got to me and I resigned in disgust. In order to leave the past behind, I was hoping for a fresh start by building my edits and reputation with the hopes of being an administrator one day. That's all up in the air right now. I'm no longer afraid to speak out, and I'm no longer trying to hide my true identity. I'm not trying to make this project into my personal battleground. I just want to get the same right and privileges and protections as other project members. Whether paid or unpaid, admin or newcomer I view all legitimate users as equals in a global virtual workshop. Being an admin does not excuse from behavior that would not be accceptable inside the WM Foundation's office building. ] (]) 12:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

<!--reply below-->

:I don't know why you keep talking about Adjwilley. I blocked you and left messages on you talk page, not him. So your plan was to retire the Technophant account and with a "clean start" Stillwaterising account continue to edit freely?&mdash;](]) 13:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::No you misunderstood me, it's the inverse. I wasn't sure which account I was going to go with but I had def. had enough of "splitting myself" into two. The confusion is completely understandable. - ] (]) 13:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::You said from the most tenacious (and obnoxious) {{U|quackguru}}: "Your evidence linking Technophant to Stillwaterising is rock solid, but there's no evidence of a crime" so why the idefinate block for a comment Adjwilly said is simply "philosophical musings?" You seem to have jumped the gun and are unwilling to just go ahead and admit the mistake? Come on, really?! - ] (]) 14:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::This doesn't seem to be a case of "no harm no foul". I was so upset over this I stayed up all night worrying about this. Now it's 9am and I have a splitting headache and the block still continues. This has been both harmful and foul and its against everything WP is supposed to be about. - ] (]) 14:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::::The edit you were blocked for was made after my comment to QG.&mdash;](]) 14:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::@]! You are acting as if you are unaware that you made a mistake. clearly shows that you were informed by ] that you made a HUGE mistake and you agree to unblock me, HOWEVER you INSIST that your block was justified in every way. I don't know you from Adam but I do see a problem here. I think this should go to RfC/U and there's a consensus it will need to go to arbitration. Sorry, but this is too big of a deception to say "oops" and pretend like you don't know you did something wrong. - ] (]) 15:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::I'm concerned about your reading comprehension skills. Adjwilley did ''not'' inform me that I made a huge mistake. I did not agree to unblock you. I have not said "oops" in any fashion, and I am pretending nothing. Your original unblock request is still up, being reviewed by multiple admins. Sooner or later, someone will deny or accept it. At this point, I would still recommend denying it. Since I'm the original blocking admin, I'm not permitted to deny it myself. That's our system for guaranteeing an independent review of all blocks, and your block is being independently reviewed. So far, no reviewer has decided that your block was erroneous.&mdash;](]) 15:36, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::Let me clarify my ] request; You are acting as if you are unaware that you made a mistake. clearly shows that you were informed by ] that you made a HUGE mistake and you agree to unblock me, However, you INSIST that your block was justified in every way. '''I see a big problem here.''' This should go to ] and there's a consensus that you are being , it will probably need to go to arbitration. This is too big of a deception to say "oops" and pretend like you don't know you did something wrong. - ] (]) 15:47, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::::Let me clarify too. I did not say that Kww made a Huge mistake. I said that I was troubled that they were the one making the block. The block could have been made by any administrator, and was not outside of community norms, though I suspect many admins would have just done a 24 hour block or something like that. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 15:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

::::::::Your interpretation of this discussion makes it clear that you aren't reading. There's no deception involved, I didn't make a mistake, and no one is saying that I have made a huge mistake. I don't know how anyone could have faith that you will abide for a topic ban when you don't demonstrate sufficient reading comprehension for me to believe that you ''understand'' your topic ban.&mdash;](]) 17:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

{{outdent}} ok, please check the logs for Stillwatering there was a topic ban discussion regarding the legality of an image and an edit that was construed as a legal threat. Now look if I have any edits regarding com:sex, alt-sex, wp:porn, whatever on this account. If you can find one I would likely years ago. There's proof positive that I can get the message of what and where I'm not being constructive and can change that energy into something positive like being top contributor and well liked in ]. This all shouldn't take long to verifify. Also, I challenge my critics to find an edit where I am knowingly lying to a user. If this all checks out then I really shouldn't have been <s>topic banned</s> blocked. - ] (]) 18:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I also have no history of edit warring, user reporting, or any known disputes with any editor withing the topic of the middle-east and Islam and these are supposedly controversial topics. Take a look at ISIS. Any history of edit wars or battleground? Isn't that kinda surprising being that it gets 50k views/day???? A sizable part of that is from my experience and guidance on the talk pages. - ] (]) 18:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

:Are you saying that it is some kind of major accomplishment that you get along normally with other people on 1 article? Getting along normally should be the norm, not the exception. And in what way is how you get along on ] related to your block? And how does that show that Kww is deceptive and is making a big mistake? Nothing you say seems to have any bearing on the subject of this discussion.--] (]) 18:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

::{{u|Atlan}}, the subject of this essay section titled "Answering allegations of sockpuppetry, attempted outings, and the truth of why I hid my identity" and I wrote it it is in response to Adjwilley's inquiry as to how can I show that if unblocked I can continue to edit productively. I'm really beginning to tire at this broken record kind of tactics to try to get me to answer the topic ban issue (already done above in great deatil) and the issue of potential SPI issues regarding the use of my alternate account.
::Actually I had been editing (as a ] '''attempt''' to try and really follow the guideline and try to get the 'ick' off me from my primarily in the topics of aviation. I used to help build flight simulators I used to also fly flight sims and model gliders. I copy edited and refimproved ] (part of the transponder system) and I put in a merger request for ] helped and contributed toward fact checking the ] article.

::I've never seen ANY user EVER have to go through this much effort just to get a closing decision on a block request. From here on out I rest my case. If anybody else asks "but how does relate to ...?" it probably won't be answered. - ] (]) 01:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

:::On a side note what is an "esoteric claim about medicine"? I googled it but the only search result is the page itself. I looked up esoteric in the dictionary and now I'm even more confused. - ] (]) 05:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::::I could see something like "sixth chakra ascending radiance" being esoteric, however the page could be more clear regarding alternative/complimentary medicine (what is or isn't esoteric). Still reading... - ] (]) 05:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::Does this mean that I need to stay away from the page ] even though I think it's not a good example of truly fringe idea? How can I tell what's declared fringe or not? Talk headers? Surely religion doesn't apply, (even though I can easily see how my own (Baha'i) would be considered such). - ] (]) 05:41, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

== Declined unblock ==

I've restored the declined unblock that you removed - a declined unblock is one of the few things you are not allowed to remove while blocked. (So to answer the question in your edit summary "do i resuse the template or start a new one?", yes, a new one.) — Alan / ] (]) 07:58, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:When I saw the unblock template I was focused on the unblock reason and failed to notice non-removal instructions. If you take look at the template and introduction to my template you'll see that I'm having multiple issues that interferred with vision and judgement. IF I'm ever blocked again I'll make sure not to do that again. - ] (]) 04:15, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

==Civility==
Making this sort of comment as an IP is not cool. ] (] · ] · ]) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:42, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:If that had come after this latest cycle instead of before, the block would quickly be reinstated. It's sad to see that someone that was so loudly proclaiming that he was not socking was, in fact, socking. If you do that again, Technophant, I doubt that anyone would ever lift the resulting block.&mdash;](]) 00:23, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::Yes I agree that he can have another chance. Hopefully things will be productive going forwards. ] (] · ] · ]) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::{{u|Jmh649}} If you look at this you'll see I gave you a Defender of the Wiki Barnstar and sincere apology. You borderline snarky reply and the above comment shows to me that you aren't ready to forgive and forget. I suggest you move on, I plan to. - ] (]) 04:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

==Possible Resignation==
The Misplaced Pages of old, as immortalized in the ] created by {{u|Jimmy Wales}} and a few other free spirits, has been crushed, gone, replaced by a ] where only the well-connected few succeed. ] is gone. Ignore all rules (except the five pillars) has been replaced by a confusing word-salad of cryptic acronyms (instruction creep). ] has been replaced by a sickening spooge-covered mess of ] articles that pass for "encyclopedic". And the most revolutionary and ] part, Misplaced Pages is free content that anyone can edit, only applies to those who use IP edits and aren't afraid of being reverted mercilessly because they don't conform to the ]'s point of view. ENOUGH!!!

In addition, all editor and especially admins should conform to Wikimedia's Foundation polices including ] and ]. Everybody who volunteers for Wikimedia are volunteer employees. Deliberate intimidation, stalking, unwelcome following and failure to treat other people with respect should be ground for immediate termination. Reporting procedures should be clearly posted and easy to complete. Contact Chief Talent and Culture Officer ] for more information. I used to really really enjoy editing WP. Maybe someday the Board will once again take the reigns and get this project back on track. - ] (]) 08:01, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Special Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | This is a token of appreciation for your work on the ] and ] pages, where your many contributions have been unfailingly helpful and your vigilance and attention to detail much appreciated. ] (]) 20:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
|}


</div>
You don't know how much this means to me. I feel like I want to cry. - ] (]) 20:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1124425182 -->


== Topic ban appeal ==
] What happened to my farewell message on the ISIS talk page? Was it - ] (]) 21:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:Why do you ask that question, when the diff you provide shows you obviously know the answer? Article talk pages are for discussing the article, not melodramatic retirement messages.--] (]) 22:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::I never even saw it on the page, but Atlan removed it on 24 July at 2.54 UTC saying, "This page is not for goodbye messages". Please reconsider resigning - after all, the block decision has not been settled yet, has it? It would be a pity to let one bad experience on one Misplaced Pages page stop you editing altogether. As you said, you had such a good experience on our pages, so why not on possibly countless others in the future? I can understand exactly why you feel as you do (...) but as I said before I really think the trouble stems from the subject. I still can't find my long post, but someone on the Help Desk has told me how I might track it down. Does this ban mean you can't even go to the ISIS/al-Baghdadi pages? (Gone midnight here in the UK.) --] (]) 23:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::] My topic ban only pertains to the area of alternative medicine, specifically acupuncture, so areas pertaining to ISIS, Iraq, and middle-eastern studies are perfectly ok as far as I know. ] Your reason for removal of my talk page entry mentioned re my farewell notice is not sustained by PAG. There is no such thing as ] but there are ]S. I recommend you restore the edit and the help desk. I am the most experienced contributor on the ISIS page and part of most every discussion regarding sources, PAG etc. Notifying the ISIS team about my block/ban/resignation is appropriate and relevant to the growth of the article. Congratulating fellow contributors is appropriate as well. Please don't try to "make me disappear". No good can come from this. - ] (]) 01:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::::It's not an appropriate place for a farewell message, plain and simple. There is no such thing as an "ISIS team" that needs to know what you are doing at all times. You are not the "most experienced contributor" on the ISIS page, at least not by any way I can measure that (not that it matters). The way you're putting it, it would seem the ISIS page should fall into chaos once the great Technophant stops editing there. While I certainly think you are a positive force on the ISIS pages, you are greatly exaggerating your influence there. And why would you want a farewell message anyway? It seems to me that once unblocked, you would gladly go back to editing there.--] (]) 10:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::<small>There's no ] but there is ] which may be a reason some people don't look kindly on publicized farewell messages. I don't like that essay myself, and my favorite essay on the subject isn't on Misplaced Pages at all: ]. <span style="font-family:times; text-shadow: 0 0 .2em #7af">~] <small>(])</small></span> 03:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)</small>
{{od}} ], I know this whole block/ban thing seems confusing. It is to me as well. Editors have just as much right as admins to make add your opinions regarding policies, blocks, bans, and noticeboard discussions. You can also try to bring this issue to the awareness of other editors or the community at large as long as you follow the ] guidelines. I'm very proud of you P, you've shown a lot of heart and determination. My ability to edit is confined to my talk page for as long as the block lasts, however I'm free to edit any other Wikimedia project including Commons. Keep up the good work, I hope to be back soon. - ] (]) 01:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:I am horrified at Atlan's unkind words. I some time ago came to the conclusion (from looking at other user pages and talk pages) that Misplaced Pages can be a snakepit. It almost put me off editing once. I cannot imagine what it must be like being at the receiving end of such unpleasantness. --] (]) 15:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::I said he is a positive force on the ISIS page, but that he is exaggerating this fact. First as leverage for an unblock, then as a reason for special treatment on the article talk page. Oh my how unkind. I'm quite the snake.--] (]) 07:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
{{od}}Wikipe>゜Ͻ～～～～～～ <!--snake swallowing the Misplaced Pages Project--> - ] (]) 14:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
:] I was referring to your hostile tone. --] (]) 18:55, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
::I am predisposed to sarcasm and I am also not one to mince words, but don't mistake that for hostility please.--] (]) 19:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
:::Not mincing words is fine - I agree with that - though sarcasm can be hurtful! But I take your point - ] (]) 21:14, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


I have as unsuccessful. There was also a consensus that you may not appeal this topic ban again for two years from this date. ] (]) 02:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
== Request for arbitration ==


:{{ping|ScottishFinnishRadish}} I wish the users at AN put more effort and time into their decisions. There may be more than this, but the “straw that broke the camel’s back” was a edit that slightly reformatted a reference link, a revision that produced the same text output as the original but didn’t need to be reverted but did by Doc James. How do I search for only my edits for a topic or page? ] (]) 02:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
@], @], @], @], and @] - Since I am restricted to only editing my talk page (and even this privilege has been threatened to be removed and ), I am forced to attempt to start an arbitration request on my own talk page. This ] regarding alleged "fringe pushing" on my part has resulted in ] Topic Ban and multiple blocks by supposedly "uninvolved" admins persuaded by multiple "neutral" editors. I admit to tendentious editing, partly due to a temporary medical condition, and partly due to my conditioned responses to apparent ] edit warring/vandalism from my thousands of constructive edits and judicious edits as a former member of Vandal Patrol.
::Hi, I hope you don't mind a word from me, but there really was no other way that appeal at AN was going to go, no matter how long it stayed open or how much time people put into it. And the "straw that broke the camel's back" edit, if there is one, is not really relevant. Your topic ban is based on your general approach to alternative medicine topics, which does not appear to be in line with the Misplaced Pages approach. That approach is to base content on what the consensus of mainstream medical science says, and not on our own disagreements with that, alternative analysis of evidence, our own opinions, or claims of personal experience and expertise. If mainstream medical science turns out to be wrong on a specific issue, Misplaced Pages will echo that only after the medical consensus has changed. In short, your approach to writing about medical topics and Misplaced Pages's approach are not compatible, so you really will need to find different topics to write about here. I do think it would be best for you to stay away from medical topics, and I wish you well with your health issues. ] (]) 06:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
I was taken to 3R "court" multiple times and '''never'' have been found to violated the 3R rule. In frustration I took ] (Doc James) : to AN3R for what appeared to unjustified reverts without clear justifications in multiple articles for reasons other consensus-based editing (ie removing valid sources without discussion of source's quality on Talk page). When I realized that I had brought this to the wrong noticeboard I promptly retracted with the statement "I've decided to retract this complaint and take it to more appropriate forum. - Technophant (talk) 12:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)".
At this point I took this discussion to AN/I . This was clearly a mistake on my part I should have taken the issue to ] and if it could not be resolved there possibly ]. My original complaint was "User is removing cleanup tags without proper justification or discussion, tendentious editing, and wikihounding." ]'s reaction to this was swift and retaliatory. He brought up distorted information and suggested " would like to propose a one year topic ban from alt med of Techno widely construed due to his disruptive editing. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)"
This quickly resulted in:


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
What followed was a slew of supporting votes. Apparently I wasn't aware of the unwritten rule "Never take an admin to AN/I" (sigh)
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
The discussion was left open for less than 7 hours, resulting in 16 yes votes and 1 no vote. The discussion was closed 10 minutes after the only no vote by ] who had previously suggested my topic ban on a user talk page.
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
'''Note:''' ] states {{quote|Sanction discussions are normally kept open for '''at least 24 hours to allow time for comments from a broad selection of community members.'' If the discussion appears to have reached a consensus for a particular sanction, an '''uninvolved administrator''' notifies the subject accordingly.}}


If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
I followed procedures and tried to formally ] as "over broad and excessive duration" but was rejected.


</div>
So, I'm left with few options. I have answered all the allegations of SPI. I had put the notice that this account was a ] account on my userpage, even though this is not required. I switched from my main account to this one not to avoid sanctions. I did so because I was threatened, insulted, etc. and was trying to get a true clean start to avoid my attacker.
</div>
I also added ] formerly ] to the ] members page. The reason I removed these notices was due to ]'s dogged canvassing and attempts to ] me. If I hadn't been threatened in such a manner I would have not tried to hide my previous identity.
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1187132125 -->
Also, please keep in mind that my that the last time I was actively editing was March 2010 and certain policies such as canvassing, ], and ] are are have either substantially changed or are completely new. All of my new starts edits prior to July 2014 have been unquestionably constructive, uncontroversial, civil, and unrelated to any alt-med topics.
In conclusion, this has all been very upsetting. To have my contributions, reputation, honesty, etc. condemned by multiple editor is a far cry from anything I could have ever expected. I'm blocked, I'm shamed, I've been insulted, and told that I should be ] ie *killed*. Why do I bother even bother to fight this? Because I care. There's a limit to the amount of abuse I can take though. This case needs to be reviewed by <u>uninvolved mature arbitrators</u> who can take a fresh look at a very unusual case. - ] (]) 12:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:33, 28 November 2023

I am semi-active, response time may be days to weeks.

MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Syria/Syrian Civil War task force

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Syria/Syrian Civil War task force, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Syria/Syrian Civil War task force and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Syria/Syrian Civil War task force during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. PC78 (talk) 17:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

I was too late on to vote, however I marked it as inactive and I'm fine with deletion. Technophant (talk) 18:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Response about Clampi on the Cleanup project page

Hey Technophant, have you seen my response? Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 12:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

NSFW

Just a quick note, as I saw your edit on the Death of Darren Rainey page: There is no NSFW on Misplaced Pages; it is uncensored and for educational purposes. See Misplaced Pages:NOTCENSORED

Happy editing! Kirby777 (talk) 01:59, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The WikiEagle - January 2022

The WikiEagle
The WikiProject Aviation Newsletter
Volume I — Issue 1
Aviation Project • Project discussion • Members • Assessment • Outreach • The WikiEagle
Announcements
  • After over a decade of silence, the WikiProject Aviation newsletter is making a comeback under the name The WikiEagle. This first issue was sent to all active members of the project and its sub-projects. If you wish to continue receiving The WikiEagle, you can add your username to the mailing list. For now the newsletter only covers general project news and is run by only one editor. If you wish to help or to become a columnist, please let us know. If you have an idea which you believe would improve the newsletter, please share it; suggestions are welcome and encouraged.
  • On 16 December, an RfC was closed which determined theaerodrome.com to be an unreliable source. The website, which is cited over 1,500 articles, mainly on WWI aviation, as of the publishing of this issue.
  • Luft46.com has been added to the list of problematic sources after this discussion.
  • The Jim Lovell article was promoted to Featured Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Hawkeye7.
  • The Raymond Hesselyn article was promoted to Good Article status on 4 December after being nominated by Zawed.
  • The Supermarine Sea King article was promoted to Good Article status on 22 December after being nominated by Amitchell125.
  • The William Hodgson (RAF officer) article was promoted to Good Article status on 26 December after being nominated by Zawed.
Members

New Members

Number of active members: 386. Total number of members: 921.

Closed Discussions

Featured Article assessment

Good Article assessment

Deletion

Requested moves

Article Statistics
This data reflects values from DMY.
Aviation pages by quality
Quality
Total
FA 142
FL 15
A 56
GA 505
B 4,573
C 11,878
Start 15,082
Stub 18,754
List 2,539
Category 11,638
Disambig 653
File 2,713
Portal 629
Project 89
Redirect 1,518
Template 2,489
NA 66
Assessed 73,339
Unassessed 1
Total 73,340
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 252,051 Ω = 4.91
New/Ongoing Discussions

Featured Article review

A-class Article assessment

Good Article assessment

Merger proposals

Splitting proposals


Deletion

Requested moves

Did you know

On The Main Page

Did you know...

Discuss & propose changes to The WikiEagle at The WikiEagle talk page. To opt in/out of receiving this news letter, add or remove your username from the mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: ZLEA

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Topic ban appeal

I have closed your topic ban appeal as unsuccessful. There was also a consensus that you may not appeal this topic ban again for two years from this date. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: I wish the users at AN put more effort and time into their decisions. There may be more than this, but the “straw that broke the camel’s back” was a edit that slightly reformatted a reference link, a revision that produced the same text output as the original but didn’t need to be reverted but did by Doc James. How do I search for only my edits for a topic or page? Technophant (talk) 02:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you don't mind a word from me, but there really was no other way that appeal at AN was going to go, no matter how long it stayed open or how much time people put into it. And the "straw that broke the camel's back" edit, if there is one, is not really relevant. Your topic ban is based on your general approach to alternative medicine topics, which does not appear to be in line with the Misplaced Pages approach. That approach is to base content on what the consensus of mainstream medical science says, and not on our own disagreements with that, alternative analysis of evidence, our own opinions, or claims of personal experience and expertise. If mainstream medical science turns out to be wrong on a specific issue, Misplaced Pages will echo that only after the medical consensus has changed. In short, your approach to writing about medical topics and Misplaced Pages's approach are not compatible, so you really will need to find different topics to write about here. I do think it would be best for you to stay away from medical topics, and I wish you well with your health issues. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)