User talk:Christopher Connor

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 12:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

Possible conflict of interest at article Christopher Connor

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Christopher Connor, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.-- Cirt (talk) 01:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

See also, Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Christopher_Connor. -- Cirt (talk) 07:27, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lynching of Ell Persons

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:On being Jewish

Your selection of images to illustrate this essay is entirely unacceptable. In view of the prior controversy concerning your having done exactly the same thing in your "BLP Nazi" essay, I conclude that you are deeply insensitive to the feelings of your editing colleagues regarding this subject. I will be raising this matter at the administrators noticeboard with the recommendation that you be blocked from editing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Please see WP:ANI#Misuse of Nazi images in an essay. Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:On being Jewish

Wikipedia:On being Jewish, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:On being Jewish and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:On being Jewish during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Access Denied – talk to me 05:40, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Block note

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for inappropriate use of nazi imagery despite warnings. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I apologise for any offence caused. I can say I'll no longer be using imagery related to the Nazis (except in articles specifically about such topics). I should say that the connection with what I'm writing about isn't what people may think. Me in Wikipedia writing mode and me in real life are often completely different. You'll find no other problems in my edits: no incivil interactions, no POV-pushing, no edit-warring etc. There's some issue with people not understanding the disconnect between the writer and what they're writing about. I also seem to be confused about exactly which website I'm writing on. Now that I've said that the use of such images will not continue, a swift unblock would be appreciated.

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=I apologise for any offence caused. I can say I'll no longer be using imagery related to the Nazis (except in articles specifically about such topics). I should say that the connection with what I'm writing about isn't what people may think. Me in Wikipedia writing mode and me in real life are often completely different. You'll find no other problems in my edits: no incivil interactions, no POV-pushing, no edit-warring etc. There's some issue with people not understanding the disconnect between the writer and what they're writing about. I also seem to be confused about exactly which website I'm writing on. Now that I've said that the use of such images will not continue, a ''swift'' unblock would be appreciated.  |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=I apologise for any offence caused. I can say I'll no longer be using imagery related to the Nazis (except in articles specifically about such topics). I should say that the connection with what I'm writing about isn't what people may think. Me in Wikipedia writing mode and me in real life are often completely different. You'll find no other problems in my edits: no incivil interactions, no POV-pushing, no edit-warring etc. There's some issue with people not understanding the disconnect between the writer and what they're writing about. I also seem to be confused about exactly which website I'm writing on. Now that I've said that the use of such images will not continue, a ''swift'' unblock would be appreciated.  |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=I apologise for any offence caused. I can say I'll no longer be using imagery related to the Nazis (except in articles specifically about such topics). I should say that the connection with what I'm writing about isn't what people may think. Me in Wikipedia writing mode and me in real life are often completely different. You'll find no other problems in my edits: no incivil interactions, no POV-pushing, no edit-warring etc. There's some issue with people not understanding the disconnect between the writer and what they're writing about. I also seem to be confused about exactly which website I'm writing on. Now that I've said that the use of such images will not continue, a ''swift'' unblock would be appreciated.  |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I've forwarded it to WP:ANI. I hope you do get unblocked, I'd like to see you be given the chance. Just don't go do something stupid like this again. StrPby (talk) 12:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. Yes, now that I've been punished for such actions, I won't be keen to repeat them. Christopher Connor (talk) 12:31, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Truth be told, the block wasn't meant to punish you, only to stop you from editing until this had been dealt with. Could you also please further say, only so as to acknowledge your understanding of what happened, that you'll be much more careful with any images linked in irony? (Nothing about them would have been untowards as illustrations of their topics) Gwen Gale (talk) 12:34, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be careful with all images from now, not just Nazi-related ones. Christopher Connor (talk) 12:37, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, would you care to comment on this? Gwen Gale (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

The subject of that article isn't me. That seemed obvious to me, and I thought should have been to others. I wasn't happy that people's immediately response was to assume bad faith and that COI has been violated - it annoys me that that's just what it's like here, always seeing if people are violating the rules, tripping others up, playing silly games. Then I was templated with the COI warning and brought to the COI noticeboard. Christopher Connor (talk) 12:56, 15 November 2010 (UTC)