User talk:IOHANNVSVERVS: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic
Line 111: Line 111:


:I only notified the editors who I directly mentioned in my report by name. I understand that since I only mentioned editors who criticized the user in question that the effect is similar to canvassing, but that was not my intention at all. I'll put a notice at each discussion mentioned in my report that I opened an ANI case pertaining to those discussions, such that all editors there involved will be more equally notified. Are there any other steps that I should take to counteract this canvassing-like inequality of notification? [[User:IOHANNVSVERVS|IOHANNVSVERVS]] ([[User talk:IOHANNVSVERVS#top|talk]]) 21:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
:I only notified the editors who I directly mentioned in my report by name. I understand that since I only mentioned editors who criticized the user in question that the effect is similar to canvassing, but that was not my intention at all. I'll put a notice at each discussion mentioned in my report that I opened an ANI case pertaining to those discussions, such that all editors there involved will be more equally notified. Are there any other steps that I should take to counteract this canvassing-like inequality of notification? [[User:IOHANNVSVERVS|IOHANNVSVERVS]] ([[User talk:IOHANNVSVERVS#top|talk]]) 21:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

== same user on another page ==

The same user you mentioned in that discussion has been removing a lot of content from [[List of engagements during the 2023 Israel-Hamas war]]. I've been unsure what to do about it. I've mentioned it to them, but I worry not very constructively. I've been trying to assume good faith because each individual edit seems justified, and I'm not even sure if the trends I think I've noticed are real, but since they're already being mentioned I wanted to point it out incase it's part of an even bigger pattern. [[User:Irtapil|Irtapil]] ([[User talk:Irtapil|talk]]) 16:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:42, 16 January 2024

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, IOHANNVSVERVS! Thank you for your contributions. I am Aristophanes68 and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Aristophanes68 (talk) 00:58, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, friend. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:59, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Satya. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Ogress smash! 09:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, IOHANNVSVERVS. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, IOHANNVSVERVS. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, IOHANNVSVERVS. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Blood-vomiting game, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Japanese. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. If you have questions, please contact me. --Orgullomoore (talk) 00:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stop participating in discussions covered by ARBPIA

You're not extended confirmed so you don't have the required permissions to participate in places like this RfC. There is a notice at the top of that discussion already informing you. Orgullomoore has already struck your comments multiple times. You need to stop. JM (talk) 07:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JM2023: Is that kinda like stalking random SPI and reinstating the abuser's abuse like here? Or what the heck is going on? What new user does this? This user needs to disclose if you have any other Wikipedia accounts. — Smuckola(talk) 09:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder of WP:NPA

Information icon Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on content, not on other users. Jeppiz (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What was the answer to mentioning Jewish/Palestinian violence that existed before the Nakba?

In your removal of the third opinion request, you said that the entry was answered, but I think I missed the answer. Did anybody actually comment on it? I did not see any edits to the pre 1948 section nor to the start of the 1948 section. (or does the lack of response mean that the answer is "Nobody actually cares"?  :-D ) --Bertrc (talk) 02:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thought AriTheHorse responded. If I was wrong feel free to relist your entry. Cheers, IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I did see that comment. It seemed to be in support of including mention of the jewish/Palestinian violence that existed before . . . so . . . Should I re-add my edits? (Sorry, I am truly a newb at wikipedia and I do not want to trample toes) --Bertrc (talk) 03:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If AriTheHorse didn't address the issue then you can relist it. You may also want to clarify/simplify what exactly you need addressed. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 03:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. @AriTheHorse: seemed to address it. The disagreement was whether or not to include rthe context of the war and the violence in which the Nakba began. AriTheHorse said he thought it should be included. I re-editted my change, fixing two bad ref links. The ref links look cumbersome in the edit box, but display properly when published. If my changes gets blindly reverted again for reasons such as "A book back in 2002 is too far back" or "Contemporary newspaper references are not good" or "We don't reference French Books" then I will relist --Bertrc (talk) 04:05, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no luck. In spite of AriTheHorse' third opinion and their support for the changes, the edit war continues. My edits were blindly reverted (with no comment in the discussion, this time). I will reraise the request for additional third opinions. --Bertrc (talk) Bertrc (talk) 03:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I raised a (horribly formatted) dispute resolution. --Bertrc (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notifying a bunch of editors who have disagreed with another editor in the past, especially while not notifying any other editors involved, of an ANI thread is inappropriate canvassing. Please do not do this again. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only notified the editors who I directly mentioned in my report by name. I understand that since I only mentioned editors who criticized the user in question that the effect is similar to canvassing, but that was not my intention at all. I'll put a notice at each discussion mentioned in my report that I opened an ANI case pertaining to those discussions, such that all editors there involved will be more equally notified. Are there any other steps that I should take to counteract this canvassing-like inequality of notification? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

same user on another page

The same user you mentioned in that discussion has been removing a lot of content from List of engagements during the 2023 Israel-Hamas war. I've been unsure what to do about it. I've mentioned it to them, but I worry not very constructively. I've been trying to assume good faith because each individual edit seems justified, and I'm not even sure if the trends I think I've noticed are real, but since they're already being mentioned I wanted to point it out incase it's part of an even bigger pattern. Irtapil (talk) 16:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]