User talk:Murry1975: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Archive |
|||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
::Sorry for the late response. For future reference, the proper template to use is {{tl|unblock}}. From my perspective, I assume, as you have reverted a version of the article to a previous one, you would have seen the warning - especially since it was the previous edit prior to your reversion. As to the matter of the reversion itself, your edit was 6 hours after the last edits to the article - as such, I found it hard to believe the reversion was accidental. If it was, please be more careful in the future. Thanks. —[[User talk:DarkFalls|Dark]] 09:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
::Sorry for the late response. For future reference, the proper template to use is {{tl|unblock}}. From my perspective, I assume, as you have reverted a version of the article to a previous one, you would have seen the warning - especially since it was the previous edit prior to your reversion. As to the matter of the reversion itself, your edit was 6 hours after the last edits to the article - as such, I found it hard to believe the reversion was accidental. If it was, please be more careful in the future. Thanks. —[[User talk:DarkFalls|Dark]] 09:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
||
:::It was accidental and I still cant figure out why, but will post this to ANI when I get a chance later today. Nobody clicking on edit would see your badly placed warning, and as for the late response you were on line after I posted, I checked your edit histoy, as blocking admin you should pay more care and attention to your blocks. Assumption isnt good enough, as above '''administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking'''. [[User:Murry1975|Murry1975]] ([[User talk:Murry1975#top|talk]]) 09:39, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
:::It was accidental and I still cant figure out why, but will post this to ANI when I get a chance later today. Nobody clicking on edit would see your badly placed warning, and as for the late response you were on line after I posted, I checked your edit histoy, as blocking admin you should pay more care and attention to your blocks. Assumption isnt good enough, as above '''administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking'''. [[User:Murry1975|Murry1975]] ([[User talk:Murry1975#top|talk]]) 09:39, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
||
::::To revert in this case, you will need to do more than just to click "edit". I'm pretty sure my warning will be visible in the page history, considering I did it twice. Short of full protection of the page, there is no way for me to warn editors to stop, unless I have omniscience. Do I simply just give a new warning every time another editor comes in with the intention of edit warring? No, of course not, as people will just abuse it. A part of choosing whether to block or not involves the use of discretion - did I believe that your edit was accidental, given the 6 hours difference between the last edits to the page and your revert? Was there any possibility of an accidental edit conflict where you unintentionally restored a previous version? Again no, I did not and no, there was not. You, yourself could not explain how the revert happened. As for the late response, I did not have your talk page watchlisted and have apologised accordingly. I assumed as an established editor, you will have knowledge of the unblock procedure. Feel free to put my actions up for review on ANI if you so wish. —[[User talk:DarkFalls|Dark]] 11:55, 15 July 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 11:55, 15 July 2013
 | Please leave messages and questions below. If I left you a message please answer on your talk page. |
|
Sorted by date:
|
Blocked for edit warring on Urmia
Since you felt it was appropriate to continue the edit warring on Urmia, despite my warning to all parties to stop and discuss changes on the talk page, you have been blocked for 24 hours. —Dark 05:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- DarkFalls, sorry my edit was to the flag in the infobox, and I didnt see the edit summary warning, which is not my faul. BTW I only edited the flag from the infobox, I dont have a clue how I managed to re-instate the other info, that was not my intention. Which is why on my second edit I only removed the flag As per WP:MOSFLAG
- So a couple of questions,
- as I happened across the article how was I meant to know about the edit-warring going on and the alledged warning in a edit summary?? Thats not on.
- So by following WP:MOSFLAG guidelines and making sure I didnt somehow manage to re-add sometime I didnt even intend on editing, I got blocked? For what? Following guidelines? Murry1975 (talk) 14:09, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- Arent you meant to use the block template so it links me to the unblock template? Murry1975 (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- From the blocking guidelines, with added emphsis by me,
- In general, administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking. On the other hand, users acting in bad faith, whose main or only use is forbidden activity (sockpuppetry, vandalism, and so on), do not require any warning and may be blocked immediately., my second edit on that page shows exactly what was intended.
- Blocking is a serious matter. The community expects that blocks will be made with good reasons only, based upon reviewable evidence and reasonable judgment, and that all factors that support a block are subject to independent peer review if requested. Murry1975 (talk) 14:23, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late response. For future reference, the proper template to use is {{unblock}}. From my perspective, I assume, as you have reverted a version of the article to a previous one, you would have seen the warning - especially since it was the previous edit prior to your reversion. As to the matter of the reversion itself, your edit was 6 hours after the last edits to the article - as such, I found it hard to believe the reversion was accidental. If it was, please be more careful in the future. Thanks. —Dark 09:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
- It was accidental and I still cant figure out why, but will post this to ANI when I get a chance later today. Nobody clicking on edit would see your badly placed warning, and as for the late response you were on line after I posted, I checked your edit histoy, as blocking admin you should pay more care and attention to your blocks. Assumption isnt good enough, as above administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking. Murry1975 (talk) 09:39, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
- To revert in this case, you will need to do more than just to click "edit". I'm pretty sure my warning will be visible in the page history, considering I did it twice. Short of full protection of the page, there is no way for me to warn editors to stop, unless I have omniscience. Do I simply just give a new warning every time another editor comes in with the intention of edit warring? No, of course not, as people will just abuse it. A part of choosing whether to block or not involves the use of discretion - did I believe that your edit was accidental, given the 6 hours difference between the last edits to the page and your revert? Was there any possibility of an accidental edit conflict where you unintentionally restored a previous version? Again no, I did not and no, there was not. You, yourself could not explain how the revert happened. As for the late response, I did not have your talk page watchlisted and have apologised accordingly. I assumed as an established editor, you will have knowledge of the unblock procedure. Feel free to put my actions up for review on ANI if you so wish. —Dark 11:55, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
- It was accidental and I still cant figure out why, but will post this to ANI when I get a chance later today. Nobody clicking on edit would see your badly placed warning, and as for the late response you were on line after I posted, I checked your edit histoy, as blocking admin you should pay more care and attention to your blocks. Assumption isnt good enough, as above administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking. Murry1975 (talk) 09:39, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late response. For future reference, the proper template to use is {{unblock}}. From my perspective, I assume, as you have reverted a version of the article to a previous one, you would have seen the warning - especially since it was the previous edit prior to your reversion. As to the matter of the reversion itself, your edit was 6 hours after the last edits to the article - as such, I found it hard to believe the reversion was accidental. If it was, please be more careful in the future. Thanks. —Dark 09:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)