User talk:Barleybannocks: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Pseudoscience sanctions notice: warning |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
[[Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation]]<!-- Template:Teahouse_HostBot_Invitation --> |
[[Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation]]<!-- Template:Teahouse_HostBot_Invitation --> |
||
==Pseudoscience sanctions notice== |
|||
{{Ivmbox |
|||
| The [[WP:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] has permitted [[WP:Administrators|administrators]] to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions]]) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to [[pseudoscience]] and [[fringe science]]. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], satisfy any [[Wikipedia:Etiquette|standard of behavior]], or follow any [[Wikipedia:List of policies|normal editorial process]]. If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience#Final decision|Final decision]]" section of the decision page. |
|||
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions]], with the appropriate sections of [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures]], and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system. |
|||
| Ambox warning pn.svg |
|||
| icon size = 40px |
|||
}}<!-- This message is derived from Template:Uw-sanctions -->--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 00:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
*You have reverted three times today at the [[Rupert Sheldrake]] article. You are already aware that the article is subject to discretionary sanctions. Such behavior is disruptive. Consider this a '''warning''' that if you continue to engage in such conduct, now or in the future, you may be sanctioned '''without notice'''.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 22:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== Pro-Sheldrake sources == |
|||
Can you please post them separately, either on my talk page or here. I'm struggling a little might just be a bit tired (not emotional). [[User:Barney the barney barney|Barney the barney barney]] ([[User talk:Barney the barney barney|talk]]) 21:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 22:40, 19 November 2013
something here
Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot
|
Hi Barleybannocks! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Pseudoscience sanctions notice
The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to pseudoscience and fringe science. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.
--Bbb23 (talk) 00:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- You have reverted three times today at the Rupert Sheldrake article. You are already aware that the article is subject to discretionary sanctions. Such behavior is disruptive. Consider this a warning that if you continue to engage in such conduct, now or in the future, you may be sanctioned without notice.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Pro-Sheldrake sources
Can you please post them separately, either on my talk page or here. I'm struggling a little might just be a bit tired (not emotional). Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)