User talk:AmandaNP

Wikipedia:Babel

en

This user is a native speaker of the English language.

fr-3

Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau avancé de français.

es-1

Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español.

Search user languages

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Admin awareness

Hi, by the look of things you may be too high-up to concern yourself with this, so feel free to kick this matter to someone further down the chain as appropriate, but I would like at least someone admin-ish to be aware of this interaction, because it doesn't feel quite right to me the way that's developing. I don't know who the other party is on Wikipedia, whether they have special privileges, whether they're admin-adjacent, etc., and I don't know how I could check that, and I don't strictly need to know, and I'm not asking for any particular action to be taken at this point, save for that I'd just like someone suitable to be aware, and I'd like to preserve a record for others to see. I think it all started out kinda okay, but it's moving to the point where it's getting close to Wednesbury unreasonableness. There seems to be increasing attempted over-enforcement, with attempts to take some broadly helpful guidelines extremely literally, all by someone who for all I know might be just another user. I think they're basically trying to throw the book at me to "win" what they can't win on the merits.

What convinced me to actively seek third-party supervisory attention was that this user attempted to prohibit me from cosmetically editing my own comments, and then they edited my comment and literally boxed me in, with a not-so friendly box-header labelling the now boxed-in contents to be a "lecture" – after lecturing me out-of-band, in a way other readers of the Talk page conversation would have missed had I not noted that for the record (in the edit summary), and after effectively saying they hadn't given what they'd boxed in a full read (they'd only skimmed it, they said).

Basically, I don't really want to talk to that particular interlocutor anymore if I can avoid it. None of us is truly alone on Wikipedia, and I've edited—and would like to continue to be able to edit—my own comments for clarity, not to mislead, but just in case third parties come along and read them, whence they can come to their own conclusions, and maybe decide to respond or pick up the baton, maybe even much later. Actually, second thought, maybe I would like it if to that end, someone not me, but with genuine authority to lord it over others without being a mere self-appointed authoritarian would revert the boxing-in edit, because that box seems punitive, and it's really messing with the way others will see the conversation, but according to that user's "rules", I can't revert their edit of my comment, but apparently they felt empowered to edit mine.
Suffice it to say that if that person isn't an admin, I would hope they don't become one, at least not unless significant time passes in which they really, really change a lot.

I am mindful that I'm the new account here, which is another reason I'd prefer to have some supervisory awareness, and perhaps vindication of my rights, simply to proactively avoid a LIFO outcome, whether forced or unforced.

Thank you for your time. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 00:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I realise this message is, ironically, also out-of-band so far as my public interaction with that other interlocutor is concerned, but I don't know whether I'm yet talking to the person who might handle this, or how you'd like to handle this message to your Talk page. Given how clean it is, it would probably be foolish for me to presume that I could link to something on your Talk page and expect it still be there later. I suppose anyone who's really stalking me can probably see this message in my Contributions.

I can understand what you are saying through out all of this, but I don't see where you want me to comment. You talk about leaving it alone, but then still want to peruse it, but then talk about seemingly different topics. -- Amanda (she/her) 03:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom Line Up-Front:
It looks like I was caught in the dragnet of a broad IP range block for a while – and might be again. I would probably need some sort of exemption from IP or IP range blocks if you want to ensure I can keep replying. It seems to be difficult to even ask for that without revealing personal information and while stuck in such a dragnet.

Originally composed message follows:
Here is fine, if that's fine by you. I would like to talk to someone admin-ish, but I'm somewhat unsure I'm in the right place, so if this sounds like something you'd rather delegate, that's perfectly fine. I'm just mindful there may well be a more appropriate person or established mechanism or better channel of communication I'm quite possibly simply unaware of. I mean, I found you, but by the look of things you're possibly quite senior? —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 14:16, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IPBE is subject to the standard conditions. I can't just grant it for you to respond, sadly.

You are likely correct that I'm unlikely the person you are looking for, mostly because I don't edit articles much. That said, I can't refer you anywhere else because I don't know what subject you are asking about. -- Amanda (she/her) 05:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Separate request

I apologise for the noise, but while I currently still can talk (to an admin): I've been trying to contact User:JWB (not to be confused with User:JBW), but I'm not eager to give Wikipedia an email address. I can't see if JWB has given Wikipedia their email address. Would you be able to say if they have done that, and if I could thus message them upon coughing up mine? (I do realise I still might not reach them, and they might not reply even if they have registered their email. If you wanted to go above and beyond, you could potentially email them to ping them about my above message on their Talk page. There's a risk I might have trouble replying due to another IP dragnet, but this is just an attempt.) Many thanks. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 01:12, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They have email enabled, and I'm sorry, but for many different reasons, I don't take actions on behalf of a user that affect another. -- Amanda (she/her) 05:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Hi, sorry but I didn’t understand why you blocked this user? [1] 9002Jack (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't disclose the reason as it involves CheckUser data. That said, it is not blocked on itwiki as you can see, it's been disabled/given an exemption on that wiki. -- Amanda (she/her) 04:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DASH

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Hi! I couldn’t help but notice that your user page uses hyphens for dates instead of n-dashes. Normally I would just fix it boldly, but since it’s fully protected… As I assume Amanda usually has more important things to do, I suppose this request is addressed more to any friendly talk page stalkers with admin privileges. Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 08:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did I miss a memo? MOS only applies to articles unless it's an accessibility issue. Is this an accessibility issue that I don't understand? -- Amanda (she/her) 08:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that there's no obligation to harmonise with the MoS in userspace; I've disabled the edit request. Happy‑melon 10:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]