Jump to content

User talk:Guerillero

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ceha (talk | contribs) at 17:26, 21 May 2020 (→‎EE sanctions: Comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Future Projects

User:Guerillero/COVID-19


workshop talk page/Arbcom

hello, Im writing because the 'workshop' phase for Arbcom has finished, however multiple editors are continuing on its talk page, I don't feel comfortable engaging these individuals since the case in now waiting decision, what do I do? [1]they are pinging me?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ozzie10aaaa: I closed the talk page --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 19:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you reopen the page? It appears to be the only appropriate venue for identifying editing that fits Behavior during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision. Otherwise, where is the appropriate location? There was editing during the end of the evidence phase, and during the workshop phase, which I tried adding to the talk page for the proposed decision [2]. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 18:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal: I see that you added it to the evidence talk page, which should work. I see no reason to reopen the workshop talk page --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I found a work-around.
There should be some guidance on when to close the pages that gives plenty of time for responding to all the last minute commentary. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 14:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot stop the vitriol by closing talk pages. Eschoryii (talk) 10:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not your job but they all should be sanctioned. Eschoryii (talk) 10:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Eschoryii: But it is a way to enforce behavioral standards and to lower the stress of a case. There shouldn't be a never ending mudpit when there isn't anything to do at the case except continue to argue with the people you have been arguing with for months --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 13:05, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet Accusation

Hi, just a heads up, I responded to your false accusation that I am running a sockpuppet account. While the evidence is near incontrovertible that this is not a legitimate account, it is not mine. As an administrator I hope you have the means and inclination to determine who is behind it. Rambo Apocalypse (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you please let me know what's happening regarding your false accusation? How long do these accusations normally take to resolve? Are there any efforts underway to determine who is actually behind it? Rambo Apocalypse (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comment

In Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Statement_by_Guerillero_2, could you clarify who you mean when you say "people who, have more than a decade of history editing in a battleground-like way"? In particular, I want to be clear whether you intended to refer to me, or not. I think this vague reference to people should be either clarified, with pings to those you mean or WP:REFACTORed and struck out/removed. Digging up ancient history is rarely helpful. Before replying, I also encourage you to check my essay at User:Piotrus/Morsels_of_wikiwisdom#Mud_sticks,_or_on_activity_of_editors with a follow up at User:Piotrus/Morsels_of_wikiwisdom#This_cannot_be_over-emphasized:_mud_sticks on this very topic. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:26, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I have seen Icewhiz's involvement being used as a blanket reason for why an editing restriction should be lifted by people who were on the other side of conflicts with him. That pool of people overlaps with a 13-year long history of problems in the topic area. The EEML was the oldest of the cases in the topic area that I can remember and is the most blatant example of a small group of editors pushing a POV in the topic area. It wasn't a dig at you. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 16:05, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your clarification. Two rights don't make one wrong, I agree, although out of curiosity, which discussion do you mean? AFAIK only two editors from the EEML era are still active, and if you don't mean me and the other is right now half-topic banned from that TA, what is the relevance? And EEML wasn't the oldest case in this TA, but it was the culmination of a series. I'd have to dig which was the first one. Btw, remember User:Russavia? I find it worthwhile to consider who ended up indef global(!) banned, and who tried to mend their ways and is still here, despite all the mud sticking. CLEANSTART is such an appealing opinion sometimes, but it is just not always possible (even when one is not under any sanctions). And, of course, there's the "bad" way of doing this (so when I say there are only two editors from that still case around, the odds are I am likely wrong, but how to tell, eh?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for List of presidents of Washington College

On 21 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article List of presidents of Washington College, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that paneling from the east room of the Hynson–Ringgold House (pictured), the current official residence of the president of Washington College, was sold to the Baltimore Museum of Art in 1932? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, List of presidents of Washington College), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 07:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC) 12:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hynson–Ringgold House

On 21 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hynson–Ringgold House, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that paneling from the east room of the Hynson–Ringgold House (pictured), the current official residence of the president of Washington College, was sold to the Baltimore Museum of Art in 1932? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hynson–Ringgold House), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 07:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC) 12:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EE sanctions

Why? I made my changes by wikipedia rules, and the other users didn't, yet I was the one being punished. Why is someone allowed to delete sourced quotes, does not participate in talk pages, does not explain his edits, and somebody else is punished insted of him. How is that even possible? Where did I brake any rule? Čeha (razgovor) 17:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC) If it was denied, where is the problem of letting my comment in it? If there is a sentence, a person which was sentanced has the right to comment it. At least it is so in majority of cases.Čeha (razgovor) 17:26, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guerillero&oldid=958026743"