DrFleischman (talk | contribs) |
→Notice: new section Tag: contentious topics alert |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
: I was checking over your edits because I noticed a severe bias. I have made zero personal attacks on you which is very clear. BUT more importantly you seem to have the problem and need to not [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|attack]] other editors and please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]], both of which you have already been warned about this past week by other editors. [[User:AlaskanNativeRU|AlaskanNativeRU]] ([[User talk:AlaskanNativeRU#top|talk]]) 17:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
: I was checking over your edits because I noticed a severe bias. I have made zero personal attacks on you which is very clear. BUT more importantly you seem to have the problem and need to not [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|attack]] other editors and please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]], both of which you have already been warned about this past week by other editors. [[User:AlaskanNativeRU|AlaskanNativeRU]] ([[User talk:AlaskanNativeRU#top|talk]]) 17:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
||
== Notice == |
|||
{{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' |
|||
'''Please carefully read this information:''' |
|||
The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2|here]]. |
|||
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved admins|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. |
|||
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> — [[User:MShabazz|MShabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/MShabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 21:15, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:15, 14 July 2017
knowledgeable
MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?
You are being contacted because you contributed to a recent discussion of MOS:IDENTITY that closed with the recommendation that Wikipedia's policy on transgender individuals be revisited.
Two threads have been opened at the Village Pump:Policy. The first addresses how the Manual of Style should instruct editors to refer to transgender people in articles about themselves (which name, which pronoun, etc.). The second addresses how to instruct editors to refer to transgender people when they are mentioned in passing in other articles. Your participation is welcome. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, AlaskanNativeRU. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
University at Buffalo
Please be the better person and take it to the talk page... you're engaging in an edit war that doesn't need to happen. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 17:50, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
yes you're right I'm sorry. The IP editor got to me. His previous edits were all reverted from other pages and he was putting fake stuff like St._Bonaventure_University is an all-male university. Based on all this I got frustrated but still believed my edits were correctly defending the integrity of Wikipedia. Thanks AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- No worries. I do the same thing... probably more than I should! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 18:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
July 2017
Hi. I'm kind of taking a neutral position on the content dispute at Talk:Dana Loesch so far, but I want to note here that I find your summary for this edit completely inappropriate. I think this constitutes a personal attack and is very disruptive to the collaborative process. I will report you to administrators if you do something like that again. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
- Dr. Fleischman , I'm not seeing how that constitutes a personal attack? His profile is very clearly single sided, and his edits on the black panthers page shows that much (he just took out information that put them in bad light). I'm sorry that it provoked a reaction out of you, I did not mean to do so. I can tell you're a neutral and solid editor here so hopefully we can work past this. Thanks.
Also look how he acted on this edit which he took out info, that me and another editor already agreed it belong - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_Panther_Party&diff=790575670&oldid=790560360
Now that's inappropriate.AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
- I am talking about your conduct, not theirs. Don't call an editor racist during a content dispute, and don't tell an editor they're so biased that they have to get pre-clearance at talk. Both of those things personalize the dispute and inhibit constructive discussion. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Personal attacks and WikiStalking
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.
Please stop making personal attacks against me and stop WikiStalking me. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 17:09, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
- I was checking over your edits because I noticed a severe bias. I have made zero personal attacks on you which is very clear. BUT more importantly you seem to have the problem and need to not attack other editors and please stay cool, both of which you have already been warned about this past week by other editors. AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 17:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Notice
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Template:Z33 — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 21:15, 14 July 2017 (UTC)