User talk:Cwobeel: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 06:46, 8 March 2015

This is Cwobeel's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1: 30 days

Archives

A page you started (Amanda and Jerad Miller) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Amanda and Jerad Miller, Cwobeel!

Wikipedia editor Carriearchdale just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Good timely article. Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on Carriearchdale's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dave Brat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christ Episcopal Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Arab winter

These term is not well recognized or widely used. It has not gained the traction some have desired. It seems to be fan cruft of a term. 172.56.11.229 (talk)

Edit on African Immigration To the United States

I deleted the photo because it depicts a person of European descent as an African immigrant which is ridiculous. That person is genetically 100% European and is not viewed as or treated as an African in the United States or any other country.

Please comment on Talk:American Left

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:American Left. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance needed: my comment on talk page

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hi! I just saw your reply to my topic on the Pregnancy from Rape talk page. I was concerned if I wasn't respecting the Wikipedia Pillars or not following correct protocol. If I was wrong, would be please be able to assist me? Thanks! 24.114.38.111 (talk) 23:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. Maybe register an account to get started? It will make it easier. - Cwobeel (talk) 23:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That is such a relief! I'll definitely look into creating an account. Thanks again! 24.114.38.111 (talk) 23:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have been resolved, so I've replaced {{helpme}} with {{help me-helped}}; besides, it was a request to a specific editor, so {{helpme}} wasn't really needed anyway. If you disagree, you're welcome to reopen the request. ekips39 (talk) 23:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on File talk:World marriage-equality laws.svg

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:World marriage-equality laws.svg. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why use a needlessly-long title for Attorney General nominee?

In the article on Loretta Lynch, President Obama's nominee for U.S. Attorney General, you spell out the entire name of the country. As there is a link for Lynch's prospective title earlier in that same opening paragraph, it seems a little silly to me. I shortened it simply to "Attorney General," since it is clear in context which A.G. post (not for a state, or some other country) is under discussion. You undid my change and restored the full title AND the full name of the U.S.A. Why?

Why? Because our readers are not just in the US. We have a global audience, and unless you clearly describe it as Attorney General of the United States, it will not be clear. - Cwobeel (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Democratic Party (United States)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Democratic Party (United States). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ew

I didn't mean to edit war you there, I didn't see that you had replaced it, I thought I had just neglected to move it correctly. We can discuss further on article talk. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. I think that passage is highly relevant for the lede. - Cwobeel (talk) 15:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We are both at/over 3rr I believe. I'm willing to keep going forward collaboratively, but we should probably start moving more to talk page to avoid getting into trouble. (Note, this is not a threat, I have no intent of taking you to 3rr over this stuff) Gaijin42 (talk) 22:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are right we should stop and collaborate. Thanks for the reminder. - Cwobeel (talk) 00:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Robbery in Michael Brown Case

The use of the word "allegedly" is justified, as Brown was never convicted of the convenience store robbery. Whatever 'consensus' drew the conclusion that he was the perpetrator is irrelevant, and to suggest otherwise is journalistically unsound. JoyGrenade (talk) 19:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Enforcement notification

This is a notification that you are party to an Arbitration Enforcement listing at - Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Cwobeel. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:38, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

To enforce an arbitration decision and for restoring content removed on BLP grounds during a dispute at BLPN on the page Steven Emerson, you have been blocked from editing for a period of a fortnight. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:30, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted a procedure instructing administrators as follows: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Cwobeel (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please copy my appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard or administrators' noticeboard. There is no BLP violation here, see discussion in which consensus was achieved at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Steven_Emerson_-_Part_3. Also note the edit by Binksternet ([1] restoring my edit with an edit summary of Revert... this is not BLP-violating material. So, this is not a BLP violation; more likely it is an attempt by ChrisGualtieri with which I have had a series of content disputes to get the upper hand on this content dispute. Note that I started the BLP/N thread, to gauge consensus which was achieved. The only person opposing the proposal to include was ChrisGualtieri. - Cwobeel (talk) 14:53, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]].  

There is no BLP violation here, see discussion in which consensus was achieved at [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Steven_Emerson_-_Part_3]]. Also note the edit by [[User:Binksternet |Binksternet]] ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steven_Emerson&diff=650299082&oldid=650294856]  restoring my edit with an edit summary of '' Revert... this is not BLP-violating material''. So, this is not a BLP violation; more likely it is an attempt by ChrisGualtieri with which I have had a series of content disputes to get the upper hand on this content dispute. Note that I started the BLP/N thread, to gauge consensus which was achieved. The only person opposing the proposal to include was ChrisGualtieri. -  [[User:Cwobeel|<span style="color:#339966">Cwobeel</span>]] [[User_talk:Cwobeel|<span style="font-size:80%">(talk)</span>]] 14:53, 7 March 2015 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]].  

There is no BLP violation here, see discussion in which consensus was achieved at [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Steven_Emerson_-_Part_3]]. Also note the edit by [[User:Binksternet |Binksternet]] ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steven_Emerson&diff=650299082&oldid=650294856]  restoring my edit with an edit summary of '' Revert... this is not BLP-violating material''. So, this is not a BLP violation; more likely it is an attempt by ChrisGualtieri with which I have had a series of content disputes to get the upper hand on this content dispute. Note that I started the BLP/N thread, to gauge consensus which was achieved. The only person opposing the proposal to include was ChrisGualtieri. -  [[User:Cwobeel|<span style="color:#339966">Cwobeel</span>]] [[User_talk:Cwobeel|<span style="font-size:80%">(talk)</span>]] 14:53, 7 March 2015 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]].  

There is no BLP violation here, see discussion in which consensus was achieved at [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Steven_Emerson_-_Part_3]]. Also note the edit by [[User:Binksternet |Binksternet]] ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steven_Emerson&diff=650299082&oldid=650294856]  restoring my edit with an edit summary of '' Revert... this is not BLP-violating material''. So, this is not a BLP violation; more likely it is an attempt by ChrisGualtieri with which I have had a series of content disputes to get the upper hand on this content dispute. Note that I started the BLP/N thread, to gauge consensus which was achieved. The only person opposing the proposal to include was ChrisGualtieri. -  [[User:Cwobeel|<span style="color:#339966">Cwobeel</span>]] [[User_talk:Cwobeel|<span style="font-size:80%">(talk)</span>]] 14:53, 7 March 2015 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

For the benefit of HJ Mitchell regarding this block, there is no BLP violation as discussed in BLP/N, given that the sources are reliable and unimpeachable, see below. The claims made by ChrisGualtieri are false and misleading. Filing an AE report is a serious matter, but he chose to mislead by omitting information, as a way to have the uper hand in a content dispute (this is not the first time). - Cwobeel (talk) 15:03, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Emerson has been criticized for some of his views, characterizing him as a discredited terrorism expert and an Islamophobe in The Cambridge Companion to American Islam,^[1] while Carl Ernst, the Kenan Distinguished Professor of Islamic studies at the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, described him as a prominent producer of Islamophobic discourse.^[2] Emerson responded to these and similar characterizations^[3]^[4]^[5] in an op-ed for Fox News, stating that criticism of Islam labeled as Islamphophia, and the labeling of "Islamic terrorism" as a racist generalization of Muslims, is "one of the biggest and most dangerous national security frauds of the past 30 years."^[6]

References

^ Lua error: too many expensive function calls.
^ Lua error: too many expensive function calls.
^ Lua error: too many expensive function calls.
^ Lua error: too many expensive function calls.
^ Lua error: too many expensive function calls.
^ Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

The supposed BLP-violating material is instead very well-sourced negative criticism from scholarly sources. I don't think we should rewrite policy to remove the ability from Wikipedia users to tell the reader that scholars have said negative things about Steven Emerson. The scholars are German media expert Kai Hafez, distinguished American theologian Carl Ernst, and the editorial board of the book The Cambridge Companion to American Islam, which is American theologian Juliane Hammer and Islamic studies professor Omid Safi of Duke University.[2] Scholars are our highest sources, so this negative material is of the highest quality. Binksternet (talk) 15:33, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@HJ Mitchell: I wish you had given me the chance to defend myself before issuing a block as customary. In any case, if my action at Steven Emerson was blockable, then how would you respond to exactly the same edit by Binksternet after ChrisGualtieri's revert? [3] Surely you would not block him, would you? Either there is a BLP violation or there is not; you can't just ignore the content and make a determination just because you believed that I acted against consensus.

I understand that the block was made because you judged me as having been blocked before, and assumed the worst, but and the end of the day you need to look at the context and not assume unnecessarily just because my block log that I acted against policy (I learn from my mistakes, you know?).

There was consensus to keep the material, so there was nothing disingenuous in quoting the discussion on my edit summary. The disingenuous and uncalled for, was the filing of the case by a long-time opponent in content disputes that has used BLP numerous times as way to stifle discourse. See comments by Nomoskedasticity and MrX in the different boards. - Cwobeel (talk) 20:00, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@HJ Mitchell:, will you be reviewing this block? As of this morning, the supposedly BLP violating material about which you issued the block is back in the article courtesy of other editors which were involved in the BLP/N discussion, so what is the point of this block? If there was no BLP violation, on what basis am I still blocked? Maybe accept the fact that the filer of the AE report was wrong to start with and your block in response to that spurious filing, a mistake? I think it is time for you do the right thing. - Cwobeel (talk) 04:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IMO this was a hair trigger and illl conceived block. There is obviouosly consensus this was not a BLP violation, so I can't fathom the rationale for blocking in the first place.Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 06:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[CambridgeCompanion-1] Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

[Palgrave.Macmillan-2] Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

[WaPo.FoxNews-3] Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

[4] Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

[law_as_movement-5] Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

[6] Lua error: too many expensive function calls.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

Revision as of 06:38, 8 March 2015 edit Lowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs) Bots, Template editors 2,156,982 edits m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Cwobeel/Archives/2015/February) (bot ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:46, 8 March 2015 edit undo Two kinds of pork (talk \| contribs) Pending changes reviewers 3,055 edits →‎March 2015: support unblock Next edit →
Line 117:		Line 117:

	{{yo\|HJ Mitchell}}, will you be reviewing this block? As of this morning, the supposedly BLP violating material about which you issued the block is back in the article courtesy of other editors which were involved in the BLP/N discussion, so what is the point of this block? If there was no BLP violation, on what basis am I still blocked? Maybe accept the fact that the filer of the AE report was wrong to start with and your block in response to that spurious filing, a mistake? I think it is time for you do the right thing. - [[User:Cwobeel\|<span style="color:#339966">Cwobeel</span>]] [[User_talk:Cwobeel\|<span style="font-size:80%">(talk)</span>]] 04:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)		{{yo\|HJ Mitchell}}, will you be reviewing this block? As of this morning, the supposedly BLP violating material about which you issued the block is back in the article courtesy of other editors which were involved in the BLP/N discussion, so what is the point of this block? If there was no BLP violation, on what basis am I still blocked? Maybe accept the fact that the filer of the AE report was wrong to start with and your block in response to that spurious filing, a mistake? I think it is time for you do the right thing. - [[User:Cwobeel\|<span style="color:#339966">Cwobeel</span>]] [[User_talk:Cwobeel\|<span style="font-size:80%">(talk)</span>]] 04:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

			:IMO this was a hair trigger and illl conceived block. There is obviouosly consensus this was not a BLP violation, so I can't fathom the rationale for blocking in the first place.[[User:Two_kinds_of_pork\|Two kinds of pork]]<span style="font-style:italic"><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Two_kinds_of_pork\|'''Makin'''']]</sup><sub>[[User talk:Two_kinds_of_pork\|<span style="color:#cc0000">Bacon</span>]]</sub></span> 06:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC)