| Revision as of 02:55, 31 May 2016 editSepsis II (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,988 edits that was cute← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:31, 22 December 2016 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,989 edits →Extended confirmed protection policy RfC: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery | ||
| (84 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Currently banned for dealing with socks and pointing out how useless admins are at dealing with socks. | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ==Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction== | |||
| Hi,<br> | |||
| {{Ivmbox | |||
| You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 16:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| |2=Commons-emblem-hand.svg | |||
| ⚫ | <!-- Message sent by User: |
||
| |imagesize=50px | |||
| |1=The following sanction now applies to you: | |||
| {{Talkquote|1=You are indefinitely banned from the topic of the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed.}} | |||
| == Thank you for your assessment == | |||
| You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to . | |||
| Hello. I have never come across your work on WP, the more so I want to thank you for the way you dealt with the Seaman arbitration issue.<br>For what it's worth, here is, in my opinion, what we are dealing with here. This is a high-tension topic, Mr Seaman was until recently one of the policy makers organising the covered payment of government money to sympathetic students in- and outside Israel, who would then support the current government's politics on Facebook, Twitter etc. pretending to act as private, objective contributors. He managed to be fired by his own gov't right before launching the programme on a grand scale, for making quite rude and undiplomatic political comments on his own FB page. His "friends" (or himself?) usually try to whitewash his WP page anonymously, Plot Spoiler is the only exception in a very long time, but the most extreme one of them all.<br>I didn't add anything to the article, I only brought back in what Plot Spoiler had blighted. I have rearranged one lead paragraph setting the events in a more logical, chronological sequence and addressed Plot Spoiler's formal complaints re. subchapter headings. The only additional material comes from Nishidani, a truly academic contributor. That would be it. All the best, Arminden] (]) 06:54, 27 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
| This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an ] under the authority of the ]'s decision at ] and, if applicable, the procedure described at ]. This sanction has been recorded in the ]. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the ] to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be ] for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions. | |||
| == No problem == | |||
| You may appeal this sanction using the process described ]. I recommend that you use the ] if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you.<!-- Template:AE sanction.--> ''']''' ~ (]) 20:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
| I do try, but please keep in mind that I always leave explanation on talk pages, unlike other side. In the particular case of ], this is how it goes: | |||
| }} | |||
| # First ''they'' simply remove sourced material without any discussion, basically engaging in edit war. | |||
| # After explanations on talk pages are given, then ''they'' claim source is "invalid". It can be an opinion written by university professor and published by academic house, but it's still "bad". | |||
| # After running out of arguments, ''they'' play a passivity game. However, after ''they'' realize period of inactivity in my contributions (mostly few weeks), then ''they'' return to point 1 (new edit wars). | |||
| When I say ''they'', I'm not sure am I talking about one person or group of people behind this accounts: ], ], ], ]... all blocked with an expiry time of indefinite, all socks, and all engaging in similar pattern like mr. PlotSpoiler. --] (]) 03:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
| :Yup, there are poor editors out there, but that doesn't mean you are allowed to edit poorly as well. Try using the talk page more and try going to ] if you are stuck alone with a silent revert warrior again. ] (]) 04:01, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Extended confirmed protection policy RfC == | |||
| == Peculiar warning == | |||
| You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a ] ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ ]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">]</sup> <small>(sent by ] (]) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))</small> | |||
| Why did you give an to someone for an edit from six weeks ago, for which the editor was already blocked? ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 15:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | <!-- Message sent by User:BU Rob13@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:BU_Rob13/MMS-Sandbox&oldid=756193177 --> | ||
| :It wasn't a warning, just advice, and the editor has continued to revert on that particular article, and others, this week. Unlike many admins, I'd actually like to see him improve so that he doesn't get blocked. If you look up above on this page you can see us talking about this weeks reverting. ] (]) 16:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Notification == | |||
| As one of the editors who participated in the discussion leading up to this Rfc, please see ]. ] (]) 10:32, 24 May 2016 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 16:31, 22 December 2016
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction
The following sanction now applies to you:
You are indefinitely banned from the topic of the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed.
You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Extended confirmed protection policy RfC
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13 (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))