User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

Comment please

I'd appreciate your input here: User_talk:Rlevse#Omission (starting with the Martin post). Tks. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Opinion wanted

Hello, I'm hoping that you'll give me an opinion on whether my actions on the Racism and ethnic discrimination in Israel talk page are legitimate or not. If you'd rather not, then I apologise for bothering you. I've been listing sources which I think others (or myself at a later date) may find useful. As far as I know, this does not breach any guidelines or rules. Under the guideline on How to use article talk pages, it lists sharing material as a legitimate use, which I would have thought included supplying sources. Shuki has taken exception to the listing of sources and deleted some of my comments, citing WP:NOT#FORUM, WP:NOTSOAPBOX and WP:NOTREPOSITORY (which I don't think are applicable). He also says that, by listing sources, I'm being disruptive. Thanks.     ←   ZScarpia   23:46, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

You mean stuff like that? After a brief look, I don't think this is a helpful use of the talk page. "Sharing material", in the guidelines, means article material, such as a paragraph that needs more discussion before it can be integrated into the article. Talk page comments should be focused on improving the article. Just dumping external links and external material onto the talk page does not do that. If you think this content is helpful for the article, you should present it that way: "Here is what X has to say on this topic and I think we should make reference to it in the article in the following manner, because ...". In the interim, I recommend that you remove the content if others find it unhelpful.  Sandstein  09:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll stop listing sources without supplying explanations of why I have mentioned, or what use I think may be made, of them.     ←   ZScarpia   10:18, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

User Loosmark

Unfortunately it seems that Loosmark has decided to celebrate the end of our interaction ban by resuming hostilities with me. Here he reverts in full an edit of mine which adds information regarding the subject of an article. Here he removes the majority of the information I add to an article. Could you please consider extending our interaction ban for another couple of months? Varsovian (talk) 10:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I removed the information because Varsovian is trying to make Ukrainian Nazi collaborators look Polish. Needless to say he presented no sources for his "information".  Dr. Loosmark  10:26, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The two sources given here (by me) both state that Jakiw Palij was Polish-born. As for Jaroslaw Bilaniuk, Loosmark is the one claiming without sources that the man was Ukrainian, I'm simply pointing out that he was born in Poland and giving details about exactly where in Poland. I submit that Loosmark's reaction here demonstrates that he is unable to work with me and that for the good of the project we need to be banned from interacting with each other. Varsovian (talk) 10:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Loosmark is now using false edit summaries when reverting me. Here his edit summary is "provide a source" but the sources already given show that Bilaniuk was born in Poland and was a Nazi collaborator. Please reimpose the interaction ban before Loosmark's behaviour gets even worse. Varsovian (talk) 10:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, they were born in what was then Poland, but the majority of population in Eastern Poland was Ukrainian. Varsovian is trying to add the category Polish Nazi Collaborators to the articles and none of his sources states that. And seems that instead of using the article's talk page to discuss things, he immediately ran here, working hard to make Sandstein declare it's all "bickering" and set another of Varsovian's beloved interaction bans. Instead I think we are rapidly approaching the point where a topic ban for Varsovian from all Polish articles for 6 months is in order.  Dr. Loosmark  11:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

These reverts seem to reflect content disagreements. Please do not discuss that content dispute here. The purpose of an interaction ban is not to resolve content disputes or to make you immune from reverts by each other. But if you do not manage to resolve your content disagreements without creating more drama, I anticipate that a full topic ban of one or both of you may be needed.  Sandstein  11:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Please note that I did try to discuss this (here) but that Loosmark was not interested in any resolution. Varsovian (talk) 11:25, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

AE requested

I request Arbitration Enforcement against user:Varsovian as he once again broke his Digwuren sanctions. The restriction as logged here (on 28 May) [1] is crystal clear, quote: Also, whenever he alleges misconduct by another editor, he must with the same edit provide all diffs that are required to substantiate his allegations, or link to the place where he has already provided these diffs, if he has not already provided them in the same section of the discussion at issue. In this edit today [2] he accused me of wiki-stalking him without proving a single diff (or a link where he provided these diffs), something his sanction explicitly forbids.  Dr. Loosmark  19:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Please make any enforcement requests at WP:AE, and not here, as per the edit notice of this page. Thanks,  Sandstein  20:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Whatever for?  Dr. Loosmark  20:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Because that page provides for a structured and transparent discussion, and ensures notification of the other party. And also because I am currently tired of AE.  Sandstein  20:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh I see, you are "tired of AE" and notification is a problem. Okay thanks.  Dr. Loosmark  20:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Not caring and admittedly not invited, I'd only remark there's far too much lobbying and complaining on talk pages of ArbComs and admins instead of editors going through the appropriate motions to file a formal complaint (with its bothersome prerequisites!), regardless of who is on whose/what's side. I shall do my best to take my own advice from hereon in. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 20:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

I didn't see your e-mail policy before I sent it, and wanted some feedback on whether or not I was imagining things.--Crossmr (talk) 22:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

United Flight 93

Hey Sandstein,

I am kind of new to this Wikipedia thing. There was a post I made about United Flight 93 and its memorials. I posted "Many cities wanted to memorialize the heroes of United Flight 93. Among the first was Marshall, Texas which by order of the City Commission, named "United Flight 93" a street in early 2002. The key note speaker was the mother of victim Lauren Grandcolas, Barbara Catuzzi."

You asked me to cite proof. All I can do is show you the minutes of the city commission meeting as well as a picture of the street. I was there and I believe that Marshall, TX had the first permanent (albeit a street sign) memorial of the heroes on UF93.

What do I need to do from this point?

Thanks, AEW —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aewalrii (talk • contribs) 02:00, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, where did I ask you to cite proof? I can't remember doing anything in relation to that. In general terms, please see WP:Citing sources for advice on how to cite sources. In general, sources used on Wikipedia must be published secondary sources.  Sandstein  05:38, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Topic ban violation

Hi Sandstein. I'd like to bring to your attention the topic ban violation by user:Nishidani The user made at least three comments on AN/I thread concerning I/P conflict.[3]

[4]; [5]. Here is the link to his ban. Broccoli (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, please make any enforcement requests at WP:AE, and not here, as per the edit notice of this page. Thanks,  Sandstein  06:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I have never filed AE before. Could you help me please? Broccoli (talk) 18:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The instructions are in Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, which you see when editing the page.  Sandstein  18:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Is Azerbaijan covered by my topic ban

I just made a couple of edits regarding Tayıflı ([6], [7] and [8]) and see that WikiProject Azerbaijan could do with help from English-speaking editors. However, I'm slightly concerned, given that people are already discussing an AE report against me, that somebody might claim that Azerbaijan is in Eastern Europe and thus is covered by my topic ban. Could you please advise whether Azerbaijan is covered by my Eastern Europe topic ban? Thank you in advance. Varsovian (talk) 10:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned, it is not. The country does not appear to be included in most definitions of the term found in the article Eastern Europe, and I am not aware of any problems with your editing in that area. Of course, this opinion by me is not binding on others; another administrator who may evaluate any enforcement request against you is free to interpret "Eastern Europe" more broadly and include Azerbaijan. But I would advise them against doing so.  Sandstein  11:01, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the very quick reply. I'll make sure to avoid all aspects of Azerbaijan that involve relations with coutries further west (and to keep well out of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue). Varsovian (talk) 11:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Ban

The reality of the matter is that every time Varsovian returned to wikipedia he inserted himself /invented a new dispute. You accuse me of nationalistic "persistent POV-pushing pursuit", where exactly have I done that, eh? What a joke, you just made that up to justify your ban. Jaroslaw Bilaniuk, Jakiw Palij and Bohdan Koziy are simply not Poles, if somebody tries to add the category "Polish Nazi Collaborator" then he is simply trying to insert untrue information which needs to be removed. It's as simple as that. Did you care to check if there are any sources calling these guys "Polish Nazi Collaborators" or is that falls outside your intellectual capabilities? How is removing wrong information "persistent POV-pushing pursuit"!?

I am a member of 3 Wiki Projects, I worked on many different topic areas and improved countless pages, I have created 200 new articles, and a couple DYKs as well. And what exactly has Varsovian contributed to wikipedia apart from constantly creating disputes on Polish topics? Are you able to name one single page on which Varsovian did some substantial work worthy of mention in one year of "activity" on Wikipedia? I don't ask 30 or 40 pages but ONE single page.

Your systematic attempts at trying to equal me with Varsovian are both shameful and disgraceful, but I am not surprised. One can easily guess the morals of a person who blocked me for 72 hours after I simply and politely asked if I am allowed to do something. Or person who first refuses to do AE because there is lack of transparency and a problem with notification (good one that one) and then comes back a couple of hours later to do a revenge AE nobody requested. And miraculously the transparency, which just a couple of hours earlier was this big problem, is all of a sudden no problem at all.  Dr. Loosmark  12:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocked 1 week for above "shameful", "disgraceful", and implications of immorality.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Whether or not these are blockable personal attacks, the comment including "Jaroslaw Bilaniuk, Jakiw Palij and Bohdan Koziy are simply not Poles" is at any rate a violation of the topic ban, as well as a good illustration of why it is required.  Sandstein  13:26, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Topic ban question (another one, sorry)

On the basis of comments made by Chumchum7 (calling me a troll four times in a single post) and observations made by EdJohnston and yourself regarding notification of Digwuren discretionary sanctions, I placed the standard notification and an explanation on Chumchum7's userpage. I took care not to mention anything I'm topic banned from. However, I've since noticed that the standard warning template contains a reference to the area which I am topic banned from. Should I modify the standard warning template to avoid making any reference to it? Varsovian (talk) 13:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, this text contains a clear reference to Eastern Europe and the EE-related DIGWUREN case, so you should revert this message at once if you do not want to be blocked for violating your topic ban.  Sandstein  13:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I've reverted the message as you directed. From what you say it is impossible for me to notify Chumchum7 of the discretionary sanctions, regardless of whether they may or may not apply. Could you perhaps be so kind as to suggest the best way in which deal with Chumchum7's breaches of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA? Or should I just accept that Chumchum7 can call me whatever kind of troll he wants to as often as he wants to? Varsovian (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The normal procedures per WP:DR apply.  Sandstein  14:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

So WP:ANI? I would have thought that that is a step further than notifying Chumchum7 of discretionary sanctions and am not sure that I want to take that additional step. One other thing if I may: does the topic ban mean that I am unable to even use a template which includes a reference to the topic of my topic ban? I hope you don't mind all these questions, I just prefer to ask rather than put myself in a situation where something I say could be twisted and used against me. Varsovian (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

You're banned from Eastern Europe. This means you may not warn others against misconduct in the Eastern Europe topic area, whether by template or otherwise. If the dispute between you and the other user relates to Eastern Europe, think hard about whether you want to pursue any further action. Although topic bans normally allow actions strictly necessary for dispute resolution, it will be difficult for you to discuss the other user's conduct without violating your topic ban. You may be best advised just to let the matter drop, since you will now no longer be editing in that area and the dispute may therefore become moot. Of course, if the other user misbehaves towards you in a non-EE context, you are free to use all normal dispute resolution procedures.  Sandstein  14:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed advice, it makes things much clearer. In this particular situation, the dispute regards comments made by Chumchum7 on another user's talk page, not on any page in any way related to the area I am topic banned from, so (with hindsight) probably using that template was not appropriate. On the other hand that fact that it isn't related to the topic banned area means that I can discuss this conduct. Thank you again. Varsovian (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

What's the status of AE request?

Hi Sandstein, I wonder what is the current status of this AE request [9]? Is it officially closed, end of story? To tell the truth, I have never seen a case to be closed by one of the partisans, subject to the request, rather than by administrators. I did not start the case and do not ask it to be reopen. I just would like to know because it involves me. Thank you. 20:01, 31 August 2010 (UTC)