User talk:RegentsPark

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dharmadhyaksha (talk | contribs) at 10:17, 27 May 2013 (→‎A Darkness Shines Question: cmt). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Problematic user

I was wondering if you could drop a message, or a warning, to Chaiyan anantasat (talk · contribs). All this user seems to be doing is changing a bunch of links to what they feel should be the correct wording, even though this is leading to redlinks. I've asked them to stop on their talkpage, but am getting no response, and not even edit summaries are used. It seems they took similar actions and received similar warnings in earlier bouts of editing as well. Regards, CMD (talk) 10:46, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Warned. --regentspark (comment) 14:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, hopefully that'll work. If you don't mind another question, do we have a clear policy on articles like the new French Comoros? Is it a potential copyvio? It's entirely unsourced, and it appears from the users talkpage that they had a similar issue with another article in the past. I'll drop a note on their talkpage. CMD (talk) 00:59, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The material is lifted from History of Comoros. I've restored the redirect. --regentspark (comment) 12:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Back

This user has now come back to do exactly the same things. CMD (talk) 15:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for a week. My guess is he/she will be back so we may need escalating blocks. --regentspark (comment) 17:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WT:RFA#Closers will be needed

Just a pointer. - Dank (push to talk) 16:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thx.--regentspark (comment) 17:10, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ping. - Dank (push to talk) 15:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

Question

Hey RP, hows tricks? Can you do me a favour please and look at this I am sorely tempted to remove the RFC ID as this is the third time Mckhan has posted (more or less) this same bloody question. I honestly think it an abuse of the RFC process, and can see it putting people off from ever commenting on that pox ridden article. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look later today. Got a meeting to go to! --regentspark (comment) 17:16, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Commented. Not much I can do but I wouldn't pull the RfC if I were you. --regentspark (comment) 20:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Saraiki language

Dear, Saraiki is a language, it is not a dialect. Riasti dialect, Shah puri dialect,Multani dialect, Multani language, Thalochi dialect, Thalochi ,Derawali dialect articles. I suggest merging these articles , as the all these are same. And also be Redirected to Saraiki language. Also Jhangvi dialect is dialect of Saraiki. Kindly See these External Links #1 and #2.

  • Department of Saraiki, Islamia University, Bahawalpur was established in 1989[1] and Department of Saraiki, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan[2] was established in 2006. Saraiki is taught as subject in schools and colleges at higher secondary, intermediate and degree level. Allama Iqbal open university Islamabad,[3] and Al-Khair university Bhimbir have their Pakistani Linguistics Departments. They are offering M.Phil. and Ph.D in Saraiki. Five TV channels and Ten Radio Stations are Serving Saraiki language. 182.186.116.104 (talk) 12:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi

FYI: sockpuppet investigation for WarunaNugawela. --Taivo (talk) 03:54, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commented there. This is quacking so loudly it doesn't really need an SPI but since there is one, I'll let someone else do the block. --regentspark (comment) 11:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification regarding Jerusalem RFC

A request for clarification has been submitted regarding the ArbCom mandated Jerusalem RFC process. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

noted. Thx. --regentspark (comment) 01:27, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move query

Does this move look right to you? - Sitush (talk) 05:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

nope and reverted. btw, you can revert any undiscussed move as not per consensus. --regentspark (comment) 13:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please reopen?

There is a definite rollback issue with Kwamigami. The Abuse page states: "rollback, should not be used to undo good-faith changes". -- Dravidian  Hero  11:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No point. Kwami doesn't have rollback rights so that can't be an issue. Best to discuss on the talk page of the articles or go for dispute resolution if it can't be resolved there. --regentspark (comment) 12:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

WT:Protected Page Editor

Sorry for the slight delay, I was doing a top research assignment for a sports website. I spent a few hours reading the debate last night, and I am available for an email/IRC/Skype chat later tonight. I will be expecting you and Dank emails and I will reply accordingly with some of my thoughts. Thanks Secret account 16:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I read through the discussion and will email you and wizardman my comments tomorrow. --regentspark (comment) 01:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBIP

Hey mate, I have modified the Ds notification template here so it is now obvious it is not a notification from an admin. Can you double check to see if it is OK? Darkness Shines (talk) 18:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan of logging delivery of this template anywhere so it would be better if you asked someone else. Sorry! --regentspark (comment) 18:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem mate, take care. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and have some pierogi!

Pierogi Award
Thanks for your support of my RfA. It didn't succeed this time, but that's no reason not to have some nice pierogi. Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:22, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look

Have a look at Mamata Banerjee, some well sourced material has been removed by an user which seems to have close connection with the subject (Official Cyber Team id, I guess). Please do the needful. Amartyabag TALK2ME 06:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the edits and informed the user about a possible conflict of interest. Let me know what happens. --regentspark (comment) 15:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly keep the user on your watchlist. Due to political sensitivity and past incidents, I would refrain myself from taking any action. The user has removed sourced statement from Abhishek Banerjee (another COI), which was restored though. Reporting to AIV might be needed after a strongly worded warning. Amartyabag TALK2ME 04:45, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. No problem. Will watch. --regentspark (comment) 10:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I always knew

That last bit of well poisoning from Magog would be used against me. All because I added content to an article and he wanted one last bite out of me. All people are doing is looking at that shitty vindictive message that guy left for all to see, pity nobody had the courage to do the right thing at the time and overturn it. Thanks for what you said at ANI, and I do try not be be a pain in your unmentionables Darkness Shines (talk) 13:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joseph Weizenbaum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (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) 13:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A cheezburgr 4 u

World Traveller101 haz givn u Cheezburgr! Cheezburgrs promot WikiLovez and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!

I like the username. I stayed in Regents Park when I was in London in February and I loved it there.

Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all lolcat buddiez by addin {{subst:Cheezburgr}} to their talk paj with friendly messuj to all. 

Cheers!  World Traveller101 19:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yummy. Thanks! --regentspark (comment) 19:42, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha I knew you'd like it Good luck with your edits. World Traveller101 20:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos

I wanted to acknowledge and thank you for this. It was well put and I think you swayed me to change my mind, not something that happens every day. --John (talk) 19:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You had me worried for a moment when I saw you'd posted here :) DS is an equal opportunity "pisser offer" but it takes a certain type to contribute to the kinds of articles he haunts. Mild mannered types like me would be gobbled up in a single bite! --regentspark (comment) 20:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's always a fine judgement call whether it would do more harm than good to get involved in something like this. I really appreciated your wisdom that the passion is sometimes what gets things done; the trouble it it can be wearing on others to deal with. I'm certainly happy to leave this one for now; of course if I see DS messing about with sources or edit-warring, I might still give them an enforced break. But there's almost always a better way than blocking or threatening to block. Thanks again. --John (talk) 20:53, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

Namantar Andolan

I am struggling to keep on top of changes that are being made by a more-or-less SPA at Namantar Andolan, so much so that I've not even found the time to check many of the sources. I've raised one source at RSN - here - but I have more general concerns relating to POV and dealing with them is difficult when I am spending much of my time on that article merely trying to consolidate cites, fix dreadful English, repetition, overly bold claims, probably mangled section organisation/chronology etc. Any chance that you could add it to your watchlist while I try to work my way through things? Or even have a word with the SPA, Bhooshannpy, because I don't know where to start with that: they clearly mean well even if it seems likely that they may not be entirely neutral in their approach. - Sitush (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a good faith editor. Might be better to let them edit and then fix the material at leisure. If it begins to get out of hand, warn him/her and I'll protect the page. Will leave a note on their talk page as well. --regentspark (comment) 15:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awards lists in play articles

Based on your past editing activity, you may want to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre#Award enumeration.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Jstor

See, now I am pissed off with you cos you never told me you had access to this. If you have a few moments can you see if this is there Stateless Refugees and the Right to Return: The Bihari Refugees of South Asia I need to know what this paper says about the Mukti Bahini or the Bangladesh liberation war. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. But in a couple of hours. Have to finish up some work and then get home. --regentspark (comment) 20:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked and it isn't there. International Journal of Refugee Law is hosted by Oxford Journals. There are people at WP:RX who have access to that. - Sitush (talk) 21:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shite, I do not mind begging from those I do know, not about to go asking total strangers for help, I am funny that way sorry . I just needed to know how far a source had been misrepresented. Thanks anyway. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have access to jstor too. Want? --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) The regulars at RX are great folks and they're there because they want to help. If I thought that the source has been misrepresented then I'd certainly chance my arm there and, indeed, I use it quite a lot. A lot of them post the result up to the cloud or similar, then you download from that. @Tito: it isn't there, mate. - Sitush (talk) 21:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Emailed to you DS. Part 1. Still looking for part 2. --regentspark (comment) 21:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Woah! It is there? Does WP's version of JSTOR access differ? - Sitush (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Part 2 sent. No, it isn't on jstor but I have access to oxford journals as well. Par 2 was on something called HeinOnline. (I have access to an excellent library!) --regentspark (comment) 21:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, what is not and where? And ya Wikipedia RX's JSOTR is different, see here --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Jstor is different for different users - depends on what subscriptions the user has. --regentspark (comment) 21:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(ecx3)Got it, Tg, sorry Faizan had not misrepresented it, obviously he just went off the abstract and muffed it up. Thanks I can use this in my rewrite off the article. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WMF IRC

Do you know answer of this question: User_talk:Sitush#WMF_IRC? --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've indicated my complete ignorance on Sitush's talk page! --regentspark (comment) 21:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you want to know? Darkness Shines (talk) 21:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Ask DS. The FSB know everything :) --regentspark (comment) 21:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That was mentioned in that INB thread. It is necessary to know who actually own that channel before attempting to revive it! --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indic Script yet again

Namaste, RegentsPark. You have got at least one new message at the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Please continue the discussion there!
Message added by Tito Dutta (contact) 15:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time.[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your tireless contribution you deserve this barnstar! Tito Dutta (contact) 16:01, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks (though not really deserved!). --regentspark (comment) 18:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For the article you sent me, thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anytime DS. Happy to be of help. --regentspark (comment) 12:46, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

MOS discussion

Just in case you should not notice it. - Sitush (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Commented there. Another busy day at work (to be honest, the busyness involves a three martini lunch so I can't complain!) but should have some time later this evening! --regentspark (comment) 16:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shaken, not stirred. Which is a reference both to your beverage and the recent shenanigans ;) - Sitush (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Narendra Modi becoming garbage

I guess as you are involved in the article you would not be able to use your admin powers on the article. (Thats my knowledge abt admins, could be wrong.) But for the betterment i have a proposal which i would like you to get it implemented by some or the other way. (a) Keep the article locked for indef. I dont know why it was removed the last time after 24hrs. (b) After being locked, start/continue discussion point wise; meaning propose a statementA, get majority approval and then ask another admin to edit the article. Propose B and so on... Take votes separately and strictly keep chatting to minimum. (c) Most important request would be to somehow bring some order to that talk page. But i dont see how you can do it. EVERY DAMN EDITOR IS FOLLOWING WP:BOLD AND NO OTHER POLICY. I am not gonna name the editors who are being nuisance as you know who they are. Keeping aside the content issues, this page is really getting messy because of the behavioural issues. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've backed off because of the mess. I have my own thoughts regarding the cause of it and I do foresee some blocks/topic bans etc coming before much longer. There is nothing that RP can do in an admin capacity but there should be some admins watching from the sidelines by now. - Sitush (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that the whole thing is a mess. But DD, your repeated postings on ANI are not helping. Anyway, I'm too involved to do anything other than comment on content, and even that I'm trying to do only minimally because it is rather frustrating (I have a brick wall at home that serves the same purpose!). --regentspark (comment) 15:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have not posted anything on Sitush's ANI case since 20th. And today's ANI case was in no way intended to be for this particular article. But somehow people keep dragging the contents all over the Wikipedia. I thought the thing would slow down and hence i kept myself away from the article until today. I noticed that Sitush also did. But the case just gotten worse even after we both stopped. (Lets assume here that i was the only one disrupting.) I am again going to be away from the article and wont be back untill atleast the talk page is in a better status. But unless and untill some strict action is taken, there is no way that the condition will improve any soon. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's not going to get better soon. Nothing I can do anyway. I could lend you the brick wall though :) --regentspark (comment) 16:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since I have your attention, what's your take on the article? POV tilt in favor of Modi? Against Modi? Just right? --regentspark (comment) 16:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ofcourse you can do it. Find an admin or two who can strict implement these first two points. We need a military regement on that page.
I just said i am going away from that page and you are asking me about it an dragging me again? Thats funny!!! I will answer to that in an email. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
POV tilt in favour. Actually, not so much a tilt as an acute angle. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
DD replied by email. There is no hope :) --regentspark (comment) 17:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No surprise, really. We may as well just let Modi write the damn thing, I'm truly astonished that other experienced contributors seem reluctant to get involved but presume the very common, "Oh, it's about India so no point going there ...". It doesn't seem to matter at which forum the article is mentioned, nor whether the point being raised favours Modi or otherwise. There is more or less complete apathy, and the recriminations will be considerable when they realise that Modi is touted for prime ministerial office and is quite likely to get it. I guess it is another symptom of the US/UK-centricity on en-WP as a whole. - Sitush (talk) 17:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is only some thing that you can do about an article. For example there is context tag on this article Chaukul which is of no use. And if you wish to do more, you need to give it some time, especially when there are many big mouths involved. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

You got mail. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seen and replied. (With a compliment!) --regentspark (comment) 23:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Afzal Guru

Namaste, RegentsPark. You have got at least one new message at the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Please continue the discussion there!
Message added by Tito Dutta (contact) 03:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time.[reply]

In case you also feel similar to what I have said there, feel free to revert those edits directly! --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Darkness Shines Question

Look what appeared on my watchlist today: Wikipedia:ARBIPA#Standard_discretionary_sanctions. User:Darkness Shines is up to his old tricks and is building his own private list again like he is an admin. This is the same list he put me on earlier this year. Can he do this and get away with it? Who does he think he is? Please look into this and remove any names that are not legitimately on this list. Crtew (talk) 22:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I propose the removal of any warning that says "(Non admin warning)". It's invalid. Crtew (talk) 22:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not even sure how that list is supposed to be used but, yes, probably only admin-issued warnings should be there. FWIW, I was excluded pretty much by request, so if things are to be fair then my name should be added even though I really, really do not need the templated warning - I've already acknowledged my understanding of it at ANI. - Sitush (talk) 00:21, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly! What is Darkness Shines doing? --Tito Dutta (contact) 00:28, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He is placing a template warning editors that there are discretionary sanctions on India/Pakistan articles and adding their names to a list here.
(ec)Frankly, this templated warning thing is one that ARBCOM should explicitly ban but it supports it instead. In theory, there is nothing wrong with warning an editor who edits in an area under sanctions since it is purely for informational purposes but, in practice it is used to intimidate and is a big turn-off for content-only editors like Crtew. I'm not sure what to do about this except, perhaps, just automatically pop the template onto the talk page of every editor who edits India/Pakistan pages. I'll ping Salvio on this. (Though, I must say that DS's actions are the first attempt I've seen to break this logjam.) --regentspark (comment) 00:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes. I'm not questioning the good faith of DS here. And we do not always agree. The outcome, however, might be unintentionally skewed. - Sitush (talk) 00:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it is an ArbCom topic, if anything. No more heat at WT:INB, please. - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree. It's more of an ArbCom clarification thing, not really for us to discuss. Salvio is the right person to deal with this. --regentspark (comment) 01:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other editors like Sitush, RP, Drmies, Faizan, Soham321, MohitSingh, Aurorion, Dwaipayanc and Maunus along with his dozens of IPs, even if are considered to have knowledge of these sanction, should also be included in that list, if at all one wants to be fair. I see that only so-called-anti-muslim-hindu-nationalist-SPAs are picked and enlisted. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:57, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Who decides who is on the list and who isn't? And why didn't you suggest your own name? Crtew (talk) 08:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's placed below my comment. But is this question really for me, Crtew? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The template makes it clear this is a non admin warning, I modified it. Maunus and Sitush already know about it Drmies does as well, I only notified those who where mentioned at ANI. Arbcom allows non admins to place those warnings, so nothing to do here. Darkness Shines (talk) 07:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What are you going to do Darkness, list every single user who edits on India or Pakistan? No, so the list is selective, and it's your personal list of warnings, and yet you have no authority to make these judgments. If the warnings are benign as you're suggesting, then how about if I just go on the board and delete every single warning that you posted there. We both know, you would have a tantrum. And I noticed your name wasn't at the top of the list. You could make it a lot easier on everybody by just refraining from assuming powers that you don't hold. Crtew (talk) 08:27, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I hardly need to be notified about something I already know about. The list is not selective, only those involved in the ANI thread whose names were mentioned were added, posting a notification is not claiming any "power" arbcom has given permission for editors to place these notifications, you can place them, any editor can. Feel free to add me to it if you wish, I am not worried in the least. I placed those notifications per Sal's suggestion at ANI, I have broken no policies nor guidelines. Darkness Shines (talk) 08:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You want it both ways. Yes, I agree it is different from the last time when you were passing yourself off as an admin, but past abuses like that are all the more reason for someone like you to refrain from using banners like this.Crtew (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MrT just deleted all the edits we're talking about, and it is an edit I fully support! Crtew (talk) 08:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop being deliberately obtuse, I never passed myself off as an admin, I used the template an admin told me to use, you already know this. And there are no past "abuses", perhaps it is high time you stopped and moved on. Darkness Shines (talk) 08:57, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • ArbCom are currently trying to review this process, so what I say here might change soon (and is entirely my opinion as an editor), but, in general, warnings are pretty much pro forma. They are not a sanction, cannot be appealed and do not necessarily presuppose actionable disruption: they are merely a way to insure that an editor is aware that, in a given topic area, ArbCom has authorised the imposition of discretionary sanctions, to prevent unpleasant surprises. In this, they are a way to protect editors, not intimidate them (though it's true that they are worded in a way which makes intimidation a likely effect and that should change). For that reason, warnings can be given by anyone (including involved editors) and when an editor is already aware of them (for instance, because he participated in the original ArbCom case which authorised them or has reported other users to AE to have them sanctioned) they are unnecessary. And for that same reason, removing names from the list is pointless: those editors have been notified and, from now onwards, misbehaviour in this topic area can lead to sanctions all the same. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, I disagree with your analysis. I would only point to your own tortured wording (not to mean poorly worded!), but where the banner is both said to be a form of intimidation and also pro forma, a necessary warning and unnecessary/pointless. Why so many contradictions? Not to mention that you didn't even broach the topic of whose names are not on the list, which must be a large number of editors. It seems that those who advocate the listing of people are not on the list at all. Why didn't an admin ever put Darkness Shine's or Dharmadhyaksha's names on the list? (not that I would advocate the listing anybody other than serious violators of policy/rules). The listing looks pretty serious to me and to others. Anyone from outside of Wikipedia would not be able to distinguish this from a serious violation. If it walks and quacks like a duck, it should be a duck. Crtew (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Crtew, I was on the list. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Jumping in here (saw this pop up on numerous talk pages I watch)...I really don't see what the big deal is. Maybe I lack sensitivity, so if this does truly bother people, then perhaps something should be altered...but I don't see the harm in notifying or reminding someone that a certain set of articles are under extra strict rules for user conduct. I mean, I couldn't tell you without looking every single topic that's under sanctions, and so I would obviously rather know that I've wandered into a troubled area. And I know that other non-admins here issue the notification. Maybe this has more to do with how people perceive DS than the actions itself? I guess I'm trying to understand what specifically was wrong with the action--is it that people perceive DS to have chosen his "targets" with the intent of winning a content war? Or that they think DS is trying to drive away new editors in general? Or that this is part of some larger pattern of behavior by DS? Note that I'm not actually accusing DS of any of these things; I'm just spitballing to try to understand why people are upset...and try to determine if this is a case of shooting the messenger. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:05, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Qwyrxian, it is because nobody likes me Crtew, Sal already said why I am not on the list "because he participated in the original ArbCom case which authorised them or has reported other users to AE to have them sanctioned" Which I had already said to you, but feel free to add my name to it. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:09, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwyrxian: I assume that actions based on these sanctions will be taken on any editor only after they are made aware of it at least once. For eg, i trust that action will be taken on RegentsPark even if he hasn't received any templated message because we know for sure that he is aware of this. So, i my personal objection is that why only our names were placed on the list? If the list has to have any real meaning, all editors who are aware of sanctions, and not just the ones who were notified, should be enlist. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ IUB.
  2. ^ Multan
  3. ^ AIOU
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RegentsPark&oldid=556995393"