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

Levan Jibladze

Sandstein, can you please delete Levan Jibladze? This page was deleted 4 times since 2012 and I think it should definitely be deleted. Jaqeli 21:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not deleting articles without a good reason. Please review our deletion policy to understand how and why you may request that articles are deleted. Sandstein 21:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G4 and G12. I think that's a good enough reason, no? They recreate the same deleted page + with copyright violation again and again. Jaqeli 21:57, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then please use the templates listed at WP:CSD on the article, this will attact the attention of an admin specialised in speedy deletion, which I'm not. Sandstein 04:53, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sandstein. Jaqeli 05:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

James Frenkel

Hi, I've opened up a new section Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#James_Frenkel as the previous ones have been archived and I have additional, primary sources. I'd appreciate your comment there.

Thanks, Lepidoptera (talk) 19:41, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

Hi Sandstein,

Can you please delete these two my pages? this and this. Jaqeli 16:27, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can apply {{db-userreq}} to them and an admin will be along shortly to delete them. Sandstein 16:49, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Jaqeli 16:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request Clarification

Hi, I was wondering if you could clarify a couple of things concerning your statement on an WP:AE filed against me. Were you aware that I posted a response later beneath Nishidani's complaint? In case I did not provide enough detail of what occurred, I would like to explain that Nishidani made a single edit which included both controversial edits and a non-controversial correction. After reading his edit I went to the talk page to check if he has justified his edits or obtained consensus (he had not), by which time the relatively minor matter of a correction of a few words at the end of the paragraph had slipped my mind. And I was only made aware of it through the medium of the most vitriolic personal attack that I had ever encountered on Wikipedia which I think explains my response. This is an extremely common oversight that occurs when multiple changes are lumped into a single edit. I've seen it happening countless times and in my opinion it certainly does not justify Nishidani's incredible overreaction. Do you think that it is fair to harshly sanction an editor based on what it is actually a very common oversight? Would you agree that Nishidani's personal attack was way out of proportion to my error? As I'm considering going through the appeals process I would appreciate any explanation. Thanks. Wikieditorpro (talk) 15:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it is moot to discuss this now after a sanction has been imposed and before an appeal has been made. These concerns should principally be discussed with the sanctioning admin. If and when you decide to appeal the sanction, I may comment on the matter further. Sandstein 16:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But, on reflection, briefly, my response to these kinds of questions by an editor who has been sanctioned is summarized at WP:NOTTHEM. Sandstein 17:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ARE procedure question

I'm not sure if this is worth bringing up in the ARE again, but I pointed out what seemed to be an Ad Hominem personal attack made by Lightbreather towards me at the end of her comments here. First, is it an Ad Hominem attack? Second, if so, can it be addressed? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 19:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This edit just adds a diff. I don't see a personal attack in that. Sandstein 19:09, 9 July 2014 (UTC)♥[reply]

It was at the bottom where she states, "He has edited many dozens of porn articles and, IMO, he doesn't have much respect for women." Under regular circumstances I ignore comments like this, but she saw fit to make it during an ARE process. I've lost track of how many times she's accused me of making a personal attack simply based on a comment regarding a series of edits on one article or across several. This seemed more blatant. Seemingly, there are myriad of perceived problems commented on by Lightbreather that could be solved (or just not exist) if she was less personally sensitive (making issues about her) and more tolerant of the opinions of others. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 20:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That text is not added in the diff you provide. Sandstein 20:23, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I think this is the correct one. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 21:18, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delayed response. This is a personal attack or close to it, and you can bring it to administrators' attention in the section reserved for your statement at WP:AE. But considering that a mutual topic ban is about to be imposed, this interaction is not likely to change that outcome. Sandstein 18:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questions you won't answer

I know admins hate this question, but I must ask, what exactly do you expect the overall effect on wikipedia to be from my ban? Do you expect the vandalism I revert to stop? Will the hundreds of socks I deal with stop appearing? Will those who misrepresent sources stop? Will those who upload extremist maps stop doing so? Will people stop their personal or group, nationalistic campaigns to demonize and delegitimize a people and a nation? How does banning me for confronting those who seek to attack and abuse wikipedia make sense? Admins do this everyday. Sepsis II (talk) 18:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sanction imposed on you is a result of your own conduct. The conduct of others is not factored into it, and I do not expect it to be affected by the sanction. Sandstein 18:39, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I knew you wouldn't answer the question, but I'll ask again, what exactly do you expect the overall effect on wikipedia to be from my ban? How can an intelligent person not understand that their actions have consequences? You can't just deny or ignore causality. Sepsis II (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I expect the effect to be that you will cause less problems for others in one topic area for at least six months. Sandstein 19:15, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With that solid logic why not ban everyone from ARBPIA articles, that would result in zero problems. Sepsis II (talk) 19:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Facts:Socks and editors fight. Banned accounts can't fight. Socks can not be banned. Editors can be banned.

Solution to stop fights: Ban editors. Sepsis II (talk) 19:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I included you in a request for clarification

It was so empty without names so I put yours there. Please tell me what you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Cold_Fusion_is.2Fisn.27t_Pseudoscience

84.106.11.117 (talk) 03:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, your comment was very helpful in illustrating what I was referring to.

I regret how combative it sounds, and that it reflects poorly on you, my apologies for that.

84.106.11.117 (talk) 12:13, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GoT

So I don't really care about you reverting my edit here, but I did want to point out that though you suggest in your edit summary that the quote adds "little that's not already been said," I don't see anywhere in the article where anything has actually been said regarding the show's themes (or the writing at all, really). And the discussion of the plot is basically about how Martin was inspired by every era of European history. If you need to know where they shoot or how many wigs they use, the article is great though. — TAnthony^Talk 03:55, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right, we might need to rework the article to include a section about themes and influences. Even then, though, I personally don't feel that the quote you added imparts much in the way of actual information. Sandstein 07:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing my TBan

Sir, I am appealing my TBan again here, based on advice I received last time.—Khabboos (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]