Jump to content

User talk:Honorsteem: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DangerousPanda (talk | contribs)
→‎Blocked: decline
Honorsteem (talk | contribs)
Line 35: Line 35:


{{unblock reviewed | 1=As for "One to the pillars of clean starts is that an editor leaves the areas that he was once editing in.": I've never issued the Jewish-topics before with my old account (as far as Im aware of). Nobody asked me for my old account details, though, so Im surprised by your conclusion?<br>Regarding the hounding accusation, it was dealt with at [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance#Jayjg_accusing_me_of_wikihounding]].<br>As for formal reasoning, I have not been notified there was a case against me at AN/I. The topic with moving the thread was resolved as it turned out I had all right to do so.<br>To me this seems like dirty case where Jayjg can't get his way the first time (deleting his moved comments), and gets back this way, comfortably shutting me down at [[List of Jewish Nobel laureates]]. If this is tolerated, I indeed have no business on Wikipedia. -- [[User:Honorsteem|Honorsteem]] ([[User talk:Honorsteem#top|talk]]) 10:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC) | decline=[[WP:NOTTHEM]]. It does appear that you are not [[WP:CLEANSTART]], but actually improperly using alternate accounts at this time. I suggest you re-read [[WP:CLEANSTART]] and [[WP:ALTERNATE]] to understand the differences, and try to be a little less [[WP:BATTLE|battleground-like]] in your on-wiki actions. This is a collaborative project, and your actions overall do not suggest you understand this. Please do not submit another request until the ANI thread has finished, and you're prepared to follow the suggestions that come from there ([[User talk:Bwilkins|<font style="font-variant:small-caps">talk→</font>]]<span style="border:1px solid black;">'''&nbsp;[[User:Bwilkins|BWilkins]]&nbsp;'''</span>[[Special:Contributions/Bwilkins|<font style="font-variant:small-caps">←track</font>]]) 10:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)}}
{{unblock reviewed | 1=As for "One to the pillars of clean starts is that an editor leaves the areas that he was once editing in.": I've never issued the Jewish-topics before with my old account (as far as Im aware of). Nobody asked me for my old account details, though, so Im surprised by your conclusion?<br>Regarding the hounding accusation, it was dealt with at [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance#Jayjg_accusing_me_of_wikihounding]].<br>As for formal reasoning, I have not been notified there was a case against me at AN/I. The topic with moving the thread was resolved as it turned out I had all right to do so.<br>To me this seems like dirty case where Jayjg can't get his way the first time (deleting his moved comments), and gets back this way, comfortably shutting me down at [[List of Jewish Nobel laureates]]. If this is tolerated, I indeed have no business on Wikipedia. -- [[User:Honorsteem|Honorsteem]] ([[User talk:Honorsteem#top|talk]]) 10:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC) | decline=[[WP:NOTTHEM]]. It does appear that you are not [[WP:CLEANSTART]], but actually improperly using alternate accounts at this time. I suggest you re-read [[WP:CLEANSTART]] and [[WP:ALTERNATE]] to understand the differences, and try to be a little less [[WP:BATTLE|battleground-like]] in your on-wiki actions. This is a collaborative project, and your actions overall do not suggest you understand this. Please do not submit another request until the ANI thread has finished, and you're prepared to follow the suggestions that come from there ([[User talk:Bwilkins|<font style="font-variant:small-caps">talk→</font>]]<span style="border:1px solid black;">'''&nbsp;[[User:Bwilkins|BWilkins]]&nbsp;'''</span>[[Special:Contributions/Bwilkins|<font style="font-variant:small-caps">←track</font>]]) 10:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)}}
: I am aware of NOTTHEM, did you ''read'' the my actual unblock request? Question: Is it then okay for being blocked when the ANI thread is not yet finished? How am I supposed to make my case? -- 11:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)


==Disambiguation link notification==
==Disambiguation link notification==

Revision as of 11:00, 22 February 2012

January 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Reductio ad Hitlerum, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. McGeddon (talk) 10:38, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks. See my contribution on the talk page there. -- Honorsteem (talk) 11:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I understand your argument; sure, eugenics is a bad thing and it is churlish to dismiss debate of it as "reductio ad Hitlerum". All I'm drawing your attention to is the need for clarity and sourcing - a Wikipedia article shouldn't say "there has been criticism, concern and trouble regarding this subject, but we're not going to tell you where", it should say "person X has criticised it, group Y is concerned about it, and newspaper Z regarded it as 'troubling'". WP:WEASEL has a bit more about this. It's our duty to the reader to tell them where a reaction is coming from, and if it's seeming to come from nowhere (either because it's the opinion of the editor writing the sentence, or because it's "common sense"), we need to take a look through some newspapers and find someone who's actually said it. Does this sound reasonable? --McGeddon (talk) 11:43, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'd add that the article doesn't really need a "criticism" section - reductio ad Hitlerum is clearly presented as a "fallacy" throughout, rather than a useful and ironclad argumentative tool. --McGeddon (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was more referring to the using of the term. If someone says "X is like the nazi's" - where X is a valid point, and then the opponent else says, "Hah! RaH!" - then the discussion is terminated. -- 11:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Sure, people can incorrectly mistake a reasonable argument for a reductio ad Hitlerum (just as a stupid person can misidentify any argument to be any fallacy in the book), but as I say, you'll need to provide a source that's considered this particular instance remarkable, if it's going to be written about in an encyclopedia. --McGeddon (talk) 12:01, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Discussion moved to Talk:Daniel Pipes#Moved conversation -- Honorsteem (talk) 09:13, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, 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.

Electricity sector in the United Kingdom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Big Six
Nuclear energy in the Netherlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Reprocessing

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Honorsteem. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page.
Message added 18:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jayjg (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I indefinitely blocked you for the disruptive editing and hounding issues. The clean start problems only add fuel to the fire. If you would like to appeal this block please place {{Unblock|Your Reason for being unblocked}} on your talk page. --Guerillero | My Talk 05:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Honorsteem (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

As for "One to the pillars of clean starts is that an editor leaves the areas that he was once editing in.": I've never issued the Jewish-topics before with my old account (as far as Im aware of). Nobody asked me for my old account details, though, so Im surprised by your conclusion?
Regarding the hounding accusation, it was dealt with at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance#Jayjg_accusing_me_of_wikihounding.
As for formal reasoning, I have not been notified there was a case against me at AN/I. The topic with moving the thread was resolved as it turned out I had all right to do so.
To me this seems like dirty case where Jayjg can't get his way the first time (deleting his moved comments), and gets back this way, comfortably shutting me down at List of Jewish Nobel laureates. If this is tolerated, I indeed have no business on Wikipedia. -- Honorsteem (talk) 10:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

WP:NOTTHEM. It does appear that you are not WP:CLEANSTART, but actually improperly using alternate accounts at this time. I suggest you re-read WP:CLEANSTART and WP:ALTERNATE to understand the differences, and try to be a little less battleground-like in your on-wiki actions. This is a collaborative project, and your actions overall do not suggest you understand this. Please do not submit another request until the ANI thread has finished, and you're prepared to follow the suggestions that come from there (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I am aware of NOTTHEM, did you read the my actual unblock request? Question: Is it then okay for being blocked when the ANI thread is not yet finished? How am I supposed to make my case? -- 11:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Elektriciteits Produktiemaatschappij Zuid-Nederland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Delta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]