User talk:Sagaciousphil
DS alert
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Frank Matcham --RexxS (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- I assume you will also be issuing an alert to Gerda Arendt for the reverts etc she has undertaken? I have no idea why you have chosen to issue this to me - please supply evidence with diffs of where I have been uncivil in the one revert I have done of an IB since the close of the case and/or proof that I was mentioned in any way within the case, unlike the person who initiated the case, was admonished by ArbCom but still very pointedly added an IB to the article expanded by Cassianto immediately prior to his self requested block. Thanks. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- This isn't any accusation of incivility, SagaciousPhil. It's nothing more than a head's-up for you that discretionary sanctions are now active for infoboxes, and a reminder to be circumspect on Frank Matcham. I've sent the corresponding alert to Volvlogia for the same reason. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- yes, but an accusation none the less yet none to your friend/colleague as mentioned above? What a joke. Tell you what, congratulations to all of you, well done - you can all feel so proud of yourselves and claim you now have the support of ArbCom. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:46, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- It's not an accusation. Has Gerda made a revert since the case closed? I wasn't aware of it. If so, you or I could offer her the same alert. You have it all wrong: the intention of the alert is to help editors avoid inadvertently breaching discretionary sanctions, not to intimidate anyone. Please read the documentation at Template talk:Ds/alert/doc if you don't believe me. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- I really cannot muster up sufficient good faith to believe that you are unaware of this revert made by your ally. I find your templating of me in these circumstances insulting - but really do not expect anything else from people on Wikipedia now. Good luck to you all and thanks for nothing. No doubt one of your other buddies/supporters will be along just shortly as well to reprimand/block me - well, do you know what? I don't give ****. SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- I'm really sorry you seem to be so hostile to me. I'm not your enemy, even though we may have different views on some issues. I've dropped a DS alert on Gerda's page. I don't want decent, good-faith editors like you and Gerda to be reprimanded or blocked - that's the point of the alert, and something's gone badly wrong when you can't see that. --RexxS (talk) 21:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- yes, well I hope you are happy now, I have requested deletion of the latest article I was intending to work on and removed a GAN. If this is how you, ArbCom and others treat 'good-faith editors' then, yes, something is very wrong. I guess more is thought of the trolls, socks, vandals and serial copyright violators? Well done and have a nice day. SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:50, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- I'm really sorry you seem to be so hostile to me. I'm not your enemy, even though we may have different views on some issues. I've dropped a DS alert on Gerda's page. I don't want decent, good-faith editors like you and Gerda to be reprimanded or blocked - that's the point of the alert, and something's gone badly wrong when you can't see that. --RexxS (talk) 21:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- I really cannot muster up sufficient good faith to believe that you are unaware of this revert made by your ally. I find your templating of me in these circumstances insulting - but really do not expect anything else from people on Wikipedia now. Good luck to you all and thanks for nothing. No doubt one of your other buddies/supporters will be along just shortly as well to reprimand/block me - well, do you know what? I don't give ****. SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- It's not an accusation. Has Gerda made a revert since the case closed? I wasn't aware of it. If so, you or I could offer her the same alert. You have it all wrong: the intention of the alert is to help editors avoid inadvertently breaching discretionary sanctions, not to intimidate anyone. Please read the documentation at Template talk:Ds/alert/doc if you don't believe me. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- yes, but an accusation none the less yet none to your friend/colleague as mentioned above? What a joke. Tell you what, congratulations to all of you, well done - you can all feel so proud of yourselves and claim you now have the support of ArbCom. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:46, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- This isn't any accusation of incivility, SagaciousPhil. It's nothing more than a head's-up for you that discretionary sanctions are now active for infoboxes, and a reminder to be circumspect on Frank Matcham. I've sent the corresponding alert to Volvlogia for the same reason. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)