Misplaced Pages

User talk:Sandstein: 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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:25, 28 June 2013 editTheShadowCrow (talk | contribs)6,258 edits Concern← Previous edit Revision as of 23:40, 28 June 2013 edit undoTheShadowCrow (talk | contribs)6,258 edits Another concern: new sectionNext edit →
Line 52: Line 52:
:That page doesn't seem to relate to "Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts", which is the scope of the topic ban. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 22:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC) :That page doesn't seem to relate to "Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts", which is the scope of the topic ban. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 22:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
::"Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts" relates to anything Armenian-Turkish as well. Just ask ]. --] (]) 23:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC) ::"Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts" relates to anything Armenian-Turkish as well. Just ask ]. --] (]) 23:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

== Another concern ==

I also wanted to inform you of another person topic banned from AA. NovaSkola has been editing ] continuously. Though you permitted normal non-controversial Azeri football editing, this one in particular is about a club that is named after and from the Nagorno-Karabakh region, and anything about that area is considered an AA topic. He has direcly edited parts about the clubs namesake and history, as can be seen and . --] (]) 23:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:40, 28 June 2013

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

  • Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.
  • If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: ].
  • If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.


Start a new talk topic


recent undo edit

On the page Oculolinctus under the history of revisions https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Oculolinctus&action=history I saw you removed my edit ( 02:01, 16 June 2013‎ 184.39.151.104 )for not stating a source properly. I have one of the books that is very authoritative on the Fetish subject(some what funny & somewhat you don't want read it after just eating)and have been active in the community for about two decades.

The source information to cite was mentioned in the description of the page change field. I'm just at the point of editing tables right and footnotes still allude me but are on my list to learn. Oculophilia is define as fetish relating and pertaining to the eyes. Oculolinctus aka licking the eye ball is a subset of the fetishes relating to the eye ball. Often times the break out or specific activities and/or people don't get along or mesh well together. A very detailed book on the subject matter is the "Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices" By Love, Brenda viewable at http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Unusual-Practices-Brenda-Love/dp/1569800111/ Which goes in details to the numerous fetishes and objects that people can develop _______-philla to. In addition one website (of many) that contains a list of fetish terminology http://blanketfort.uninhibited.net/fics/kink/kink.html will back up the book.

I need help linking into the book for citing source and hope with information you will re add the information. With a correctly coded link to the source page in the book "Encyclopedia of Unusual Sex Practices" which I'm guessing the best way to source it is to link in from Amazon for creating the footnote correctly?

If not I welcome advice on how to do it better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.39.151.104 (talk) 02:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please refer to WP:CITE for information on how to cite sources and to WP:MEDRS for special considerations regarding medical topics.  Sandstein  08:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Likely sock

I believe I caught User:E4024 socking as User talk:LosPollosHermanos. E4024 wanted to get this picture removed because he doesn't like it and LosPollosHermanos joined Misplaced Pages less then a day later for the sole purpose of supporting the picture removal. E4024 also put one of those welcome tabs on LosPollosHermanos' talk moments later. Also notice how LosPollosHermanos shares E4024's habit of bolding his speech, which is noticeable here. I can give more examples if need be. Also notice how LosPollosHermanos was created shortly before E4024 was going to be blocked, likely as a last resort for one last attack on Armenia articles. I believe the evidence is sufficient. I recommend E4024's block be increased from 1 year to indefinite or permanent.

Oh, and the other users who tried to get the picture deleted for the same reason (not liking it) should be topic banned from Turkish articles. Wouldn't you agree? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 01:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, my talk place is not the best place for these requests. Sockpuppet concerns should be reported at WP:SPI, and topic ban requests, if the requirements are met, at WP:AE (if within the scope of WP:AC/DS) or WP:AN.  Sandstein  08:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
What about the second point? All AA2 bans seem to go to you anyway. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 16:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
As I said, that's a matter for WP:AE. But in general, just "wanting to get a picture deleted" is not normally sanctionable. It depends on the circumstances, and these can transparently be discussed at the enforcement board.  Sandstein  16:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Another topic entirely, but do you know a page that has rules Admins are supposed to follow? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 21:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
WP:ADMIN.  Sandstein  21:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
And if I see an Admin break these rules, where should I go to report it? --TheShadowCrow (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
That's discussed on the page I linked to.  Sandstein  21:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Luo Meizhen

You recently closed the articles for deletion discussion on Luo Meizhen, stating that none of the keep options addressed the policy-based delete comments. I provided an extensive policy-based comment in response to the only delete comment that actually addressed policy. All the other delete "votes" we're opinion-based or simply wrong. Please reconsider in the context of the extensive comment I made in the debate. Thanks Wikipeterproject (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

You're right, I overlooked your longer comment after reading your "As per OTMF, above" opinion. Yours is the only serious "keep" opinion, but many "delete" opinions aren't much better, so I'm relisting the discussion.  Sandstein  08:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! Wikipeterproject (talk) 07:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Rumi

I have removed this statement, "It seems that Turks claim themselves as the authors of everything except what they are actually responsible for, such as the Armenian Genocide.Wfgiuliano. I felt it was inappropriate, insulting, anachronistic, and had absolutely nothing to do with Rumi or the Seljuqs of Rum. I did not know if this was enough for Admin intervention/warning, but felt I should make you aware of this. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Racial epithets!

Hi, Sandstein. Following your close of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Gora (racial epithet) as "merge", there's been a slow edit war on the merge target's page as editors wishing to implement the consensus clash with editors who insist on a source for every entry. Please could you review the talk page of the list, my talk page, and the edit history and provide us with a third opinion when you've done so? Thanks very much and all the best—S Marshall T/C 21:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Concern

Hello Sandstein,

A user who has been topic banned under WP:ARBAA2 has edited an Armenian page. He has broken his ban a few times already...see his/her please. Thank you. Proudbolsahye (talk) 22:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

That page doesn't seem to relate to "Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts", which is the scope of the topic ban.  Sandstein  22:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
"Armenian–Azerbaijani conflicts" relates to anything Armenian-Turkish as well. Just ask Mr. Know-It-All. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 23:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Another concern

I also wanted to inform you of another person topic banned from AA. NovaSkola has been editing Qarabağ FK continuously. Though you permitted normal non-controversial Azeri football editing, this one in particular is about a club that is named after and from the Nagorno-Karabakh region, and anything about that area is considered an AA topic. He has direcly edited parts about the clubs namesake and history, as can be seen here and here. --TheShadowCrow (talk) 23:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)