Darwinian Ape (talk | contribs) |
HJ Mitchell (talk | contribs) →AE request closed: new section |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
* I understand now. I have to privately message or email people about BLP issues, I did not know it applied to all pages on Wikipedia. I don't mean to be dense but I'm honestly not super familiar with Wikipedia policies about these things. Thanks for listening. [[User:Neptune's Trident|Neptune's Trident]] ([[User talk:Neptune's Trident#top|talk]]) |
* I understand now. I have to privately message or email people about BLP issues, I did not know it applied to all pages on Wikipedia. I don't mean to be dense but I'm honestly not super familiar with Wikipedia policies about these things. Thanks for listening. [[User:Neptune's Trident|Neptune's Trident]] ([[User talk:Neptune's Trident#top|talk]]) |
||
:: I understand what you mean, there is sometimes too much bureaucracy in Wikipedia to keep up with. Though much of the policies are common sense, BLP policy is a strict one, and for good reason. Right now you probably will get some block, I don't know for how long. A comprehensive explanation of your situation (without mentioning the blp of course) and a heartfelt apology might help your situation. Wikipedia sanctions are not for punishment, they are for preventing the disruption. {{ping|Gamaliel}} might give better advise on the issue since he is an experienced admin who is reviewing your case. Although a wikibreak might be good for you, I believe and hope you wont repeat the same mistake again. [[User:Darwinian Ape|<span style=" color:#0B0B3B; text-shadow: 3px 3px #C0C0C0;font-style: italic; font-family:'Britannic Bold';">Darwinian Ape</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Darwinian Ape| talk]]</sup> 18:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC) |
:: I understand what you mean, there is sometimes too much bureaucracy in Wikipedia to keep up with. Though much of the policies are common sense, BLP policy is a strict one, and for good reason. Right now you probably will get some block, I don't know for how long. A comprehensive explanation of your situation (without mentioning the blp of course) and a heartfelt apology might help your situation. Wikipedia sanctions are not for punishment, they are for preventing the disruption. {{ping|Gamaliel}} might give better advise on the issue since he is an experienced admin who is reviewing your case. Although a wikibreak might be good for you, I believe and hope you wont repeat the same mistake again. [[User:Darwinian Ape|<span style=" color:#0B0B3B; text-shadow: 3px 3px #C0C0C0;font-style: italic; font-family:'Britannic Bold';">Darwinian Ape</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Darwinian Ape| talk]]</sup> 18:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
== AE request closed == |
|||
I have [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=671299113&oldid=671236367 closed] the arbitration enforcement request against you, the result being that you are admonished for the violation of your topic ban and for repeating a BLP violation. Please be aware that you remain banned from anything that could be reasonably construed to be connected to GamerGate or people associated with it. Further, if somebody suggests that a claim or a statement is in violation of BLP (if you haven't already, you should read [[WP:BLP]]), I strongly suggest you discuss the issue without repeating the claim. You should be aware that if you end up at AE again in the near future, the result is likely to be an indefinite block. Hopefully that won't be necessary, though. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''HJ Mitchell'''</font>]] | [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]] 20:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:45, 13 July 2015
Have you forgotten?
You're topic banned from Gamergate indefinitely m8. You shouldn't be editing the article. Bosstopher (talk) 01:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Smash!
You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.
Rhoark (talk) 03:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement
You are in violation of sanctions imposed on you in March to avoid all gamergate related pages broadly construed. I will be opening an arbitration enforcement request against you. Thorrand (talk) 02:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
BLP requires you to cite reliable sources for claims about living people
It does not seem to me that anyone has done a good job of trying to explain this to you, but the policy on biographies of living persons applies to all pages on Wikipedia. That means if you are making a claim about an identifiable living person, even if only on the talk page of an article or another user's talk page, then you should have a reliable source to back up the claim. Preferably, you should either cite the source when making the claim or be referring to sourced information already within an article. Claims made about living people that are not backed by a reliable source may be removed, even if those claims are made on a talk page and admins are allowed to block or sanction you for such claims. Such a policy exists to ensure that Wikipedia does not host or spread information that is defamatory or invasive of a living person's privacy.
At any time should you feel like raising a question relating to a living person, be sure to see if there are reliable sources already covering the issue and cite them when raising the issue. ensure that any claims you make are explicitly backed by the source as well rather than inferences. Be careful about sources too since claims about living people have much stricter sourcing requirements. The rules may seem a little restrictive, but they exist to protect people from defamation or invasion of privacy. Feel free to ask me for further details about the policy if you have trouble understanding, but please avoid saying anything that could be taken as a reference to a specific claim you have made or question you raised regarding a living individual.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 03:37, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Noted. Thank you. Neptune's Trident (talk)
Nomination of Howard Atherton for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Howard Atherton is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Howard Atherton until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:27, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Ahamefule J. Oluo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to The Stranger
- Dillon (surname) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Welsh
- Howard Atherton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Black Rain
- Kinnernet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Networking
- Patrick McGoohan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Mullaghmore
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
You can't post that
Hi, I saw you posted some information on your AE case that were not in line with our BLP policies, you can't post that information anywhere on wikipedia without a source, not just mainspace. You also have to post any statement to your section. Darwinian Ape talk 04:50, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- So I can't tell honestly what happened? Because that's what I was doing. All right, just forget it. Neptune's Trident (talk)
You can't repeat the claims if they contain BLP violations. Given that above The Devil's Advocate told you that BLP applies all pages, and your first attempt in AE was redacted because of this, I'm having hard time understanding your failure to comply with the policy. I can understand you want to defend yourself, and it must be frustrating not being able tell the whole story, but you should either do it by private channels (i.e email) or without mentioning the BLP violation itself. I hope you get a fair ruling at the AE, Best wishes! Darwinian Ape talk 07:01, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- I understand now. I have to privately message or email people about BLP issues, I did not know it applied to all pages on Wikipedia. I don't mean to be dense but I'm honestly not super familiar with Wikipedia policies about these things. Thanks for listening. Neptune's Trident (talk)
- I understand what you mean, there is sometimes too much bureaucracy in Wikipedia to keep up with. Though much of the policies are common sense, BLP policy is a strict one, and for good reason. Right now you probably will get some block, I don't know for how long. A comprehensive explanation of your situation (without mentioning the blp of course) and a heartfelt apology might help your situation. Wikipedia sanctions are not for punishment, they are for preventing the disruption. @Gamaliel: might give better advise on the issue since he is an experienced admin who is reviewing your case. Although a wikibreak might be good for you, I believe and hope you wont repeat the same mistake again. Darwinian Ape talk 18:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
AE request closed
I have closed the arbitration enforcement request against you, the result being that you are admonished for the violation of your topic ban and for repeating a BLP violation. Please be aware that you remain banned from anything that could be reasonably construed to be connected to GamerGate or people associated with it. Further, if somebody suggests that a claim or a statement is in violation of BLP (if you haven't already, you should read WP:BLP), I strongly suggest you discuss the issue without repeating the claim. You should be aware that if you end up at AE again in the near future, the result is likely to be an indefinite block. Hopefully that won't be necessary, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC)