User talk:Darkness Shines

Guide to arbitration

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration is the page you're looking for, I think. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Darkness Shines (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

None of that makes any sense at all, but I suspect that's deliberate, shall take a few days to try working it out. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

If you want me to file a basic case with a generic name, I can do that, and then you can supply your evidence later. (It would say something to the effect of DS says this, CWG says that, and ANI isn't progressing.) Or, I can just leave it until you're ready. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Given the IBAN am I allowed to collate diffs in user space to add at a later date? You know yourself I'm shite at expressing myself online, it may take a few days to format everything so it's readable for the bureaucratic types. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:19, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Generally, yes, per WP:POLEMIC, but in this case, I wouldn't. Use Notepad on your system, or Google Docs, or something like that. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

O.K. and thanks, I'm going now cos I'm getting really pissed off with the shite on ANI, I'd hate for you to have to block me again ☺ Darkness Shines (talk) 21:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

VNSA

Hi Darkness Shines Thanks for your understanding yesterday. Just wondering: are you willing to restore the 'RV sock' content at Violent non-state actor? Thought I'd ask first. I'll ask you about developing the child soldiers pages at some point, too, when I get to it. Fugitivedave (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Done, good luck to Ya, Darkness Shines (talk) 19:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Cheers! Fugitivedave (talk) 19:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Child soldiers

Hi Darkness Shines. I'd like to develop the child soldiers pages again, starting with Africa and DRC. Since you reverted my edits earlier, is there anything you'd like me to bear in mind as I edit? Or better, do you want to collaborate on it? Fugitivedave (talk) 13:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Fire away if you make mistakes I'll give you a shout in the respective talk pages Darkness Shines (talk) 14:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

3RR

Dickhead, you just violated 3RR. Oh, I can't count. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 13:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Obviously not, I was on 3RR but self reverted, cheers Darkness Shines (talk) 13:42, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm just going to assume that there is some part of the world where "dickhead" is a term of endearment and I'm not aware, like... "I sure do love Grandma and her homemade cookies. She's such a dickhead." Otherwise that would have been totally uncalled for, and someone might have deserved a stern reminder to chill out. GMG^talk 14:32, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Removal of content on talk page

Hi, I see you removed all posts in the RfC on the "Flag of Syria" talk page (because said RfC was started by sock). Is there any policy requiring such action even for comments of other editors? I find that rather unpolite, when my posts on the article talk page are treated this way. Pavlor (talk) 06:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

The policy is WP:DENY Darkness Shines (talk) 10:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

An essay? You must be joking... Pavlor (talk) 11:04, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

No I'm not joking, socks get reverted end if story, why should the community waste their time responding to a banned editors RFC? Just drop it. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Concerns regarding your IBAN

Hi there DS, I have some concerns I'd like to bring up, if you don't mind.

• On 20:11, 10 February 2018, C. W. Gilmore posted to this talk page with the suggestions including a link to the source http://komonews.com/news/local/day-of-protests-begin-at-the-university-of-washington-with-patriot-prayer
• On 09:06, 11 February 2018‎, you reverted an edit from an disruptive, possibly sock, account on the same talk page. Technically this is a violation of your IBAN, but I'm not going to block you for reverting vandalism.
• On 09:19, 11 February 2018‎, you added the same source to this article.

If you can comment on this, I would appreciate it.—CYBERPOWER (Be my Valentine) 14:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I added content to an article, that's kinda the point of editing here, perhaps you can explain more clearly how you think a violation of an IBAN took place, cos I'm not seeing it Darkness Shines (talk) 15:14, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

It's the time frame of the last two points. Just to clear things up aside from the technical violation of point two, which I'm ignoring since it was you reverting a vandal account, there is no violation to speak of. Just a concern. You reverted the vandal account above, less than 24 hours after CWG posted a new section there. 13 minutes later you edited an article CWG has not edited for 30 days using the link he posted on that talk page. That does raise an eyebrow.—CYBERPOWER (Be my Valentine) 16:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Antifa has been on my watchlist since 17 August 2017 So why the concern? Darkness Shines (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

• Are there special restrictions on this IBAN? DS is not commenting, reverting, or discussing the other editor's edits and, generally, an IBAN doesn't mean that they can't edit the same articles. --regentspark (comment) 16:51, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  Either party cannot edit the article, or its talk page, if the other has made edits to it within the last 30 days, but both have been complaining about each other following each other, and I got an email from CWG about said concern. CWG posted a link on the talk page of an article DS watches. DS uses said link on a different article within minutes of DS reverting a vandal edit on the talk page CWG left the post.—CYBERPOWER (Be my Valentine) 17:46, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Seriously? So no interaction took place, yet I'm being questioned about it? Just tell him to stop checking my contributors, then there won't be any concerns will there. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with it either personally. Thanks.—CYBERPOWER (Be my Valentine) 18:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll just say that there were no exceptions built into the expanded editing restriction for both of you. While it is pragmatic to not get all worked up over you reverting vandalism, it is a clear violation of the condition just added, regardless of whether or not the page has been on your watchlist. In the future, I suggest you report said vandalism to someone else to handle or just ignore it completely. Nihlus 22:30, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Familiarize yourself with WP:BANEX Darkness Shines (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Interaction bans are a subset of editing restrictions. Your editing restriction is not just a simple interaction ban. Additionally, both users are prohibited from editing any page and its corresponding talk page if the other user has edited either within the last thirty (30) days. Please familiarize yourself with WP:RESTRICT and the fact that the restrictions listed there explicitly state if reverting vandalism is an exception. I purposefully left it out as it would just be another thing for you two to complain about the other doing, as is the case here. Nihlus 23:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

@Nihlus: I respectfully disagree. Reverting obvious vandalism is and will always be an exception to bans. I don't think any admin is going to block someone for cleaning up vandalism. I'm certainly not going to. To make this logic more bold, I wouldn't revert a community banned editors reversion of vandalism despite all edits by CBANned users are reverted on sight.—CYBERPOWER (Be my Valentine) 01:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: You're allowed to disagree, but my intention of the restriction was to avoid any conveyance of following, stalking, or harassing. Allowing this will lead to loopholes and constant concerns that one of the two is being followed, as demonstrated by this ordeal ad nauseam. I never really suggested that this one time should lead to a block, but a continued pattern of it should be considered gaming of the restriction and lead to a block accordingly. Nihlus 01:12, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

3RR on Proud Boys

I’ve just posted a rather long and detailed (but not a diatribe) about my take on the incident and what went down. Thank you for standing up for me; I was extremely surprised as it was the incident you filed that got the initial block imposed to begin with.

(Not an attack, mind you, but it’s what surprised me the most out of the whole thing.) Scbritton (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Look, I'm a cunt, I literally have no patience for anyone at all, however you were treated harshly, I also detest that, everyone needs a second chance, eventually, like I said on your talk page, if you need help, ask, confused with the rules here, just fucking ask, I'll help as best I can Darkness Shines (talk) 21:44, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

real quick

If you choose to ignore this I totally get it but I'm waiting to see your response to @TheGracefulSlick: on the current ANI that you're involved in... In the meantime, did you, perhaps inadvertently, give the impression that if blocked you would make a new account and edit without making the connection public? Anyway, I want to see you well served by the community and I hope we don't lose you over this. Gabriel syme (talk) 06:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Too busy, I'm not creating any other accounts, TBH I'm fed up and was going to quit for a while, thanks Darkness Shines (talk) 08:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Banned from Wikipedia

Pursuant to the clear community consensus expressed here, you are indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This account will be blocked to enforce the terms of the ban. --Jayron32 12:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry it came down this way. Hope to see you back sometime in the future! --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

17 editors are now the entirety of Wikipedia 😁, and a few if them hate me, nvm cheers Darkness Shines (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Certainly some of the overly politically correct were among them (and they're the ones most inclined to hate, while preaching tolerance for their social justice causes etc) but, really, this was going to happen at some point regardless. Sorry. - Sitush (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion was only open for a couple hours too. I didn't even see the report until you'd been "community" banned. Mr Ernie (talk) 18:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Mr Ernie: To be fair, the report (which was linked to two sections up; presumably you have this page watchlisted) was opened by me 23 hours before the SBAN discussion closed, and the initial report contained a clear reference to an upcoming site-ban proposal. I am actively arguing that the site-ban proposal should be re-opened so anyone who thinks the foul language was all in good-faith (i.e., just a "European" thing) can express their opinion, but the ABF, disruptive content editing, edit-warring while completely ignoring his own sanctions (which apparently included indef 1RR) and direct personal attacks (not just good-faith "fuck me in the arse!" edit summaries) should all be noted by anyone who intends to do so. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 21:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@Hijiri88: I’ve actually never figured out how to use the watchlist. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:47, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah. I thought that was odd, too. It happened during the European night. - Sitush (talk) 18:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, I was sleeping the entirety of that discussion.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

It always saddens me when things have to come down to a ban like this... I'm so sorry to see that had to. I wish you well and the best of luck - I hope to see you participating in another project where you can learn from what happened here and use this as a positive learning opportunity. Until our paths cross again... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll do an RFC here and see how that goes 😈Darkness Shines (talk) 18:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Returning from a pleasant vacation day and now this. Sad. I keep singing your praises. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The discussion has been re-opened for a wider range of opinions. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:52, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

FYI

This. General Ization ^Talk 22:25, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

And people wonder whybi flip at times, thanks for letting me know. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:26, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Banned

Per the discussion at ANI, and I hate having to do this, but you are hereby subject to the following:

Darkness Shines (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from editing Wikipedia. They may appeal the ban either to the community or to ArbCom no sooner than after 6 months from the ban, or 6 months from their last sockpuppeting, whichever comes later.

Good luck.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:37, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Where was the socking? I didn’t see it posted in the discussion. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:48, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Mr Ernie: Although it wasn't mentioned in the discussion afaik, sockpuppetry was the reason for DS's first indef, per this admission. An SPI can be found here... not to mention this comment made about a month ago. (talk page stalker) SkyWarrior 03:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

No worries Darkness Shines (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Do me a favour, DS. Don't sock from now on. Your style is very obvious and it won't do you or the project any favours. The sad thing is, you've usually been correct in what you've tried to do with articles but you react even worse than me when you get frustrated with the idiots etc. This can be a frustrating place because it is biassed in many systemic ways but you won't change anything if you can't take part.

Bide your time, perhaps spend it doing some research, and if/when you do decide to return perhaps start on some surely uncontroversial issues where the pov-pushers are unlikely to have an interest. I vaguely recall you helping me many years ago in trying to clean up a fairly marginal notability/promotional article about a herd of pedigree cows - surely even the SJWs or whatever cannot find harm in that sort of thing? - Sitush (talk) 00:36, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Some sort of open sockpuppetry? A new trend on Wikipedia? -AsceticRosé 04:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC).

• +1 to what Sitush said. You've done good work here, and could continue to do, but only if you wait out the terms of this ban. Do some research, prepare some things you'd like to write, go on holiday, learn Spanish, whatever. Don't sock; you'll be discovered and blocked in no time, the appeal period will be reset, and anything you've written is likely to be reverted with no regard for its quality. To be clear, I'm not saying socking would be justified if it went undiscovered, not at all. I'm saying it won't do you any good to try. Vanamonde (talk) 06:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
• +2. I think I came up with a nice way to keep useful idiots like you within the system but it looks like we have a preference for polite POV pushers. C'est la vie. --regentspark (comment) 23:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

In the desert

despised and rejected

the desert is a good place for introspection

Food for your trip in the desert. Handel's birthday, he composed He was despised, and I made it a redirect in March 2012. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

mentioned you - more music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

To those who we sense, and the few who get how I am,gbyeDarkness Shines (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

This was a goodbye from here, not from life, just sayin cos of a very nice email I just got. I'm grand ☺ Darkness Shines (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Very much good luck yo! Come back here some day. Gabriel syme (talk) 05:59, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Indeed. Glad to hear you are ok, and also hope to see you again. You did much good stuff, and sometimes you lost your temper. I'd sooner a dozen of you than one persistent "civil" POV pusher. Best of luck whatever you do. Don't be a stranger. -- Begoon 06:12, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

What Begoon said, word for word. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe one day I'll be back Darkness Shines (talk) 20:03, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Interesting shite

Should I ever be let back labour antisemitism Darkness Shines (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2018 (UTC)