User talk:Lightbreather

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia as of May 2015.

Interaction ban with Scalhotrod

Due to your recent inappropriate interactions with Scalhotrod, stemming from the edits made to the National Rifle Association, I am placing both of you under a mutual interaction ban under the authority of the discretionary sanctions authorised in the Gun Control arbitration case. You may interact with Scalhotrod only on the Lightbreather arbitration case, and only according to the conditions laid out at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Evidence#Case management. This sanction will last indefinitely, and is placed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator not as an arbitrator. Thryduulf (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Which of my interactions was inappropriate? Could I get a diff? Lightbreather (talk) 20:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Principally your back and forth at Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. It is not so much a single edit by either of you, but the tone of your interactions which are not conducive to improving the encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 21:13, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Would you please make this a 1-way? Evidence has shown over and over again that he is the one who hounds me, not the other way around. Lightbreather (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

The short answer is no. I believe that a one-way interaction ban would not be in the interests of the encyclopaedia at this point in time. This is based on a combination of your behaviour, contributions, and the public and private evidence submitted by all parties to the arbitration case. Thryduulf (talk) 23:00, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Please email me copies of evidence sent privately about me. Thanks. Lightbreather (talk) 23:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, would you be open to someone reviewing the ban - someone who hasn't already made up their mind about me, I mean? Lightbreather (talk) 23:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

All remedies imposed as discretionary sanctions can be appealed at WP:AE. Thryduulf (talk) 07:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Block Notice

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring at National Rifle Association. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.   Mike V • Talk 22:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Workshop

Hi, Liz. Does the workshop end at the beginning of June 7 or the end? Lightbreather (talk) 16:33, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Chiming in here because I saw this: case phases ordinarily close at 23:59 (UTC) of the day scheduled to, so in answer to your question, the end of June 7. Of course, it is up to the discretion of the drafting arbitrators whether to even close on the day of, and clerks are not supposed to close phases, even when scheduled, without the authorization of a drafting arbitrator. --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:42, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

When deciding how strictly the end of workshop deadline is to be treated the drafters (sometimes with input from the rest of the Committee) take into consideration things including how productive the workshop has been, whether there is any ongoing productive discussion, how close to a proposed decision the drafters are, and any reasons we are aware of that might have prevented a party taking part to the extent they want to. In this specific case, the workshop end date has not been the subject of significant discussion among the committee as a whole and I am not aware how strictly the drafters intend to treat the deadline so it is best to assume that it will close on schedule at 23:59 7 June (UTC). Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Temporary injunction at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather/Proposed decision

The Arbitration Committee has enacted the following temporary injunction, which supersedes all other provisions:

Lightbreather and Scalhotrod are placed under a temporary full interaction ban (sans the usual exceptions). They may comment on each other only on matters directly affecting this case and only on the relevant Workshop or Arbitration case talk pages. They may comment on allegations of off-wiki misconduct only by email and such emails must be directed only to the Arbitration Committee. This temporary restriction may be enforced by any clerk or administrator by means of immediate redaction of potentially problematic material and blocks of up to seventy-two hours. Appeals may be made only by the sanctioned user(s), are to be made to the Arbitration Committee only by email. This temporary restriction will expire when the case closes and supersedes any other provisions regarding permissibility of comments.

For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:16, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Drawing from previously presented evidence

Regarding this comment: you will see from previous cases that the findings in the final decision refer to sections and diffs from the Evidence page, or diffs that have already been presented on the Evidence page. This is what is meant by the proposals flow from matters in evidence. isaacl (talk) 23:25, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Blocked for 72 hours

For this rather blatant violation of the temporary injunction, I have blocked you for 72 hours. This block may only be lifted with the positive consent of the Arbitration Committee. The clause you violated was "They may comment on allegations of off-wiki misconduct only by email and such emails must be directed only to the Arbitration Committee." Courcelles (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2015 (UTC)