Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:03, 23 December 2010

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nableezy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nableezy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

December 2010

AE--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 19:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

How do you stand it?

Quite frankly I don't understand how you keep level headed when having to deal with a bunch of slimy, hypocritical, scheming, thugs on a daily basis (I am not, of course, talking about Wiki editors here as I am obliged to "assume good faith" and observe standards of civility) Prunesqualer (talk) 17:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

"Level headed" is not a description that is often applied to me. nableezy - 17:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

James G. Lindsay

As you can see I'm in the middle of writing the article. Wait until I'm finished and then if you think it's not important enough, suggest it for deletion. That's common wiki courtesy. Nik Sage (talk) 18:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Common "wiki courtesy" is to not recreate articles that had already been deleted. In fact it is not "wiki courtesy" that says this but rather it is Misplaced Pages policy (G4). You have recreated an article deleted by consensus. If you wish to do that you should be going to DRV. Ill be tagging that as qualifying for CSD G5 shortly. nableezy - 18:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

How could I've known that the article was deleted? I've started to write an article about Lindsay while writing an article about UNRWA's chief John Ging. Ging talked about Lindsay's report in an interview. I've looked for this man and saw that there is no article about him, so I started writing one. I first heard about mr. Lindsay while reading the interview twenty minutes ago. As I was not in the deletion arguement before, you should've deduced that I don't know anything about it and refer me to it through my talk page. That's what I mean by courtesy. Nevertheless, I'm not as proficient as you in wiki procedures so I'll be much obliged if you'll explain what are "DRV. Ill" and "CSD G5". Nik Sage (talk) 18:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

You would know after I made my edit, as what you reverted, without comment, had a link to the AfD that resulted in the original page being deleted. DRV is "deletion review", it is the process used to contest the result of an AfD, whether it be keep or delete. You can read about it here. CSD is "categories for speedy deletion", it is a set of rules for what may be deleted without discussion. One of those rules is material that has already been deleted following a deletion discussion. You can read about is here. Finally, to the problem with reading an interview and making an article. Misplaced Pages has rules for what may be acceptable articles. Those rules include demonstrating that the subject is "notable". This requires citations to third party reliable sources. Your "article" is nothing but a collection of quotes from papers written by the subject, that is not a single citation to a reliable third party source is provided. That is not what Misplaced Pages articles, especially biographies of living people, should be made of. nableezy - 18:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks dude. Now I know more about wiki procedures. When I write on Wiki it is usually focused articles and I don't spend much time editing others - hence why I'm not so proficient in these rules. I'm still writing the article, and I'll try to do it by the wiki rules you presented. Give me a chance and then I'll be glad to hear any comments or criticizm. Nik Sage (talk) 19:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

If you want to do that you should do it in your userspace. You could for example make the article at User:Nik Sage/Lindsay. Once complete you could post to DRV and ask if people feel your draft should be moved in to article space. What you shouldnt do is revert the redirect, and you really shouldnt revert two different users who restore the redirect. nableezy - 19:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi dude. I've incorporated Lindsay's info inside UNRWA's page, thus expanding the James Lindsay section there. I think it makes UNRWA's page a little cumbersome, what do you think? What do you say about me creating a special page for the report, i.e. Lindsay report or something to that nature, or is it best to leave it as is? BTW, Thanks for all the wiki tips. Nik Sage (talk) 14:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I dont think that material needs to be given such in-depth coverage at the UNRWA page, it is a single person's opinion about a very large organization. If there are enough third-party sources covering the report an article on it would be fine, but you cant write an article on the report and use the report itself as the source. You need to get secondary sources actually covering the report. nableezy - 17:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Got it. Leave and learn. I'll start digging in the web. Nik Sage (talk) 15:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Is criticizm from inside UNRWA of the report, is considered as a secondary soure that covers the report? Nik Sage (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but it wouldn't be a third party source so it wouldnt demonstrate notability of the topic. nableezy - 15:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nableezy. I've found third party sources. Lets continue the discussion in Lindsay talk page. BTW, I'll appreciate your inputs about this page List of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East employees. Nik Sage (talk) 16:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Im sorry, but as you may see below I cannot comment on this as it is in the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area. nableezy - 03:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Recognition

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		Because you continue to argue your case calmly and reasonably, refusing to compromise your beliefs or your commitment to the principles of Misplaced Pages, despite all of the pressures and hostility you encounter. RolandR (talk) 18:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much Roland, nableezy - 03:12, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Well deserved. Sol (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

On further examination, it appears the article edits occurred half an hour before you were informed of the topic ban. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

What? All of the article edits took place before the topic ban was instituted and the conversation with Enigmaman was started before the topic ban was placed as well. Had he responded in a timely fashion, that conversation would have been done before as well. This block is wrong (it was made based on a misapprehension by the blocking admin) and should be immediately lifted, with apologies. Tiamut 23:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, but what the fuck is this? Could you please post a single diff of me violating my topic ban? nableezy - 23:51, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

You've been unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 00:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

All right. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Topic ban

Per this AE thread, and under the authority of WP:ARBPIA#Discretionary sanctions, you are hereby topic banned from all articles, discussions, and other content within the area of conflict, as defined in WP:ARBPIA#Area of conflict, for four months. You may appeal this topic ban by the procedure provided for in WP:ARBPIA#Appeal of discretionary sanctions. T. Canens (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Tim, I would like a clarification as to whether or not this ban applies to filing SPI reports, and if it does then an explanation as to why it applies there. nableezy - 15:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Any particular sockmaster you have in mind? T. Canens (talk) 01:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I dont know, should it matter? You may have noticed I am familiar with more than a few. If I happen to see one, whichever one, am I banned from filing an SPI? nableezy - 03:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

In that case, you should not, since such an SPI case would presumably involve an article...within the area of conflict. If the case is obvious, I'd imagine there would be plenty of other editors who are capable of filing such cases. If no one files a report within a reasonable period of time, you may email me or another uninvolved administrator with the evidence for review. But for whatever reason, it seems that SPI cases related to topic areas under arbcom sanctions also tend to become battlegrounds, and I would not risk that. T. Canens (talk) 22:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Whatever, your life. I think it incredibly stupid that you would include SPI in the ban. The only thing that results from that is that banned users are permitted to continue violating their bans. That SPI reports become "battlegrounds" is something that can attributed solely to one "side" here. Take a look at the SPI for Dajudem or some of the ones for NoCal. The users that are willing to defend sockpuppetry so long as their "side" is the one engaging in it (and it is shocking how much of the sockpuppetry comes from one "side" here) come from only one "side". You will not find users defending or protecting sockpuppets viewed as "pro-Palestinian". But as stopping serial sockpuppeteers such as NoCal100 or Dajudem is less important than restricting me from editing an SPI, Ill leave that alone as well. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Tim, while the Sock Slayer is away the socks may play? Not the best scenario?     ←   ZScarpia   14:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what the hell is going on around here. In any case, please email me any sock reports and I will be happy to post them to SPI. Tiamut 23:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Can always just email a CU directly, I just wanted to see how Tim would answer. Color me unsurprised. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

So much for transparency ... anyway, hope that you are well sadiqi, despite the unnecessary restraints. Tiamut 00:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

All good sis, could use a break anyway. nableezy - 00:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm available for SPI report filing too. Sean.hoyland - talk 13:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

@Tiamut you said "I don't understand what the hell is going on around here." Well it seems clear enough to me. This organisation has been infiltrated and off message editors are being systematically silenced. Prunesqualer (talk) 15:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I dont think that is true. You are understandably upset with how you were treated here, and Misplaced Pages does have a problem with how new editors are treated in contentious topics. I could give you some advice if you like, nableezy - 15:44, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

But please don't mention the I-P area while you're doing it!     ←   ZScarpia   16:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Don't mention the war! (<==Pretend Basil Fawlty is saying this) I'm also happy to help out on SockWatch 2010.Sol (talk) 18:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Ive removed the link as you cant link to copyright violations on Misplaced Pages. nableezy - 19:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Sol, surely not: Sockwatch?     ←   ZScarpia   00:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha, wow. Of all the unlikely names (and themes) for an adult Yahoo group. Well played! Sol (talk) 01:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments?

Hi Nableezy. Do you have any comments on these? , . Looks fishy to me; I suspect attempted entrapment; any ideas? Thanks. RolandR (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The second one is almost certainly a sock, maybe of the first and maybe NoCal come back to annoy you. You should file an SPI then ask for semi-protection. At AN3 I would ask how a "new" user knows within 4 hours of registering their account what the edit-warring noticeboard is. nableezy - 15:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I am sure that the second is a sock of the first; and I thought of asking you about the first yesterday, as the behaviour seemed odd. But what grounds do you have for linking this to NoCal? There are other potential sockmasters too; do you see any common features? RolandR (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

NoCal has in the past come out of nowhere to push Tiamut into a 3RR vio on topics not in their usual pissing grounds, though he usually return to his favored topic area. See for example the early edits of Lovely day350 (talk · contribs). But I think you are probably right, that these two accounts are the same. nableezy - 15:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ill take care of the SPI. nableezy - 17:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, while looking into this I found an SPI to be completely unnecessary. See here. nableezy - 17:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I was halfway through an SPI submission when Magog submitted a case; at the same time, you made yyour discovery, which I had missed (I was looking at the wrong log). That truly was incompetent sockpuppetry! Thank you for your help. Meanwhile, I am certain that this was a sock of a blocked user, so I hope a CU is approved and finds out who. RolandR (talk) 17:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

See the CU result: "The name you are looking for is almost certainly User:Ledenierhomme". RolandR (talk) 14:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)