WT:RFAR archives (2004–2009) |
---|
Various archives (2004–2011): |
Ongoing WT:A/R archives (2009–): |
WT:RFAR subpages |
Archive of prior proceedings |
Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2022
Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 08:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Edit request: banned user talkpage
- moved from User talk:Jytdog
Since Jytdog is banned, please remove all content on his userpage and replace with the following (invisible unless viewed in edit source):
Another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ALugnuts&type=revision&diff=1102002458&oldid=1101167456 Yleventa2 (talk) 19:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note to reviewing admin: I've asked ArbCom to clarify this here: [1]. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- This page isn't the right place for this discussion but a specific user's talk page is absolutely a worse place. I would decline the request. This decision is made on a case-by-case basis and there is no policy mandating blanking. Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/Procedures § Enacting bans and editing restrictions, which is a procedural guide, doesn't say to blank. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:10, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- (pings: @Yleventa2 and Tryptofish: KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:10, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- This page isn't the right place for this discussion but a specific user's talk page is absolutely a worse place. I would decline the request. This decision is made on a case-by-case basis and there is no policy mandating blanking. Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/Procedures § Enacting bans and editing restrictions, which is a procedural guide, doesn't say to blank. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:10, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- comments made post-move:
- @L235: I see, thanks. What determines whether pages of banned users get blanked or not? Yleventa2 (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- With all due respect Yleventa2, it's probably best you don't worry about that and find something more constructive to do — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 20:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- I will do that TheresNoTime Yleventa2 (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- With all due respect Yleventa2, it's probably best you don't worry about that and find something more constructive to do — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 20:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- @L235: I see, thanks. What determines whether pages of banned users get blanked or not? Yleventa2 (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the prompt response, L235! I'll note that the edit (not the request) was reverted by Praxidicae; thanks for that, too. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:24, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- And I reverted this blanking, and will again, if required. Just leave these people alone, Yleventa2. Bishonen | tålk 20:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC).
- I've gone ahead and restored Lugnut's userpage, since I see no need to blank here. A tag would be sufficient. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:16, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- @CaptainEek: You reverted the banned user template along with reverting the blanking. Perhaps you didn't intend that. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Tryptofish Huh, didn't even see it, but I've added it back. Is it supposed to be visible? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I saw it in the edit history, but the only thing visible on the user page is a hidden category. The thinking behind making the template non-displaying is discussed at the ACN talkpage section about the deletions case. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Just as an fyi: Template:Banned user/doc § Syntax has details on how to use the template for users banned by the arbitration committee. isaacl (talk) 22:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Tryptofish Huh, didn't even see it, but I've added it back. Is it supposed to be visible? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- @CaptainEek: You reverted the banned user template along with reverting the blanking. Perhaps you didn't intend that. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Help, anyone. Triangle (Israel) might need you
Hey, not even sure this is the correct address for such an issue, please if the site's spirit is important to you ignore the possibly wrong technical placement of my post (or migrate it to where it's best answered) and just follow simply: I have spent a good hour this afternoon here improving and carefully fixing Triangle (Israel) all following Wiki's guidelines (a senior editor here), only to see a few hours later that someone randomly and single-button-edly removed all my edits restoring the article to its thinner, less-accurate and less-Wikipdially-coherent version -- all with NO explanation. Just cause they could.
Please be sure to inspect my editing there carefully and make sure that the right decision is made, in terms of determining which of the two users has acted in line with how we act on here. Many thanks in advance.
Orrling 109.67.135.58 (talk) 22:03, 27 August 2022 (UTC) 109.67.135.58 (talk) 22:03, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Hello. Due to an arbitration decision relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict only editors with the "extended confirmed" right are allowed to edit about the conflict. To get this right you need to have had an account for 30 days and have made 500 edits. As an unregistered editor you do not have an account and therefore cannot edit about the conflict. This was enforced by reverting your edit. Although the edit summary could have been clearer (through the use of a wikilink) is does provide an explanation (ARBPIA4 is the shorthand for the decision that requires editors have the extended confirmed right). This information is displayed in a notice that is shown at the top of the edit window (this does not show on mobile), but I understand if you are frustrated that your edits were reverted. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:15, 27 August 2022 (UTC)