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

The decision

I would like to appeal my ban. I have never damaged the macedonia pages with edits, but appear to annoyed some editors on the other side of the argument. In fact I have never edited the Macedonia pages to my knowledge, only ever given opinions on one or two talk pages - hense a topic ban of anything 'Macedonian' seems draconian and perhaps symbolic of a lack of understanding of my perceived 'crime' according to Fut Perf. I do not tend to edit the article pages because it causes conflict, however I do give my opinion on topics and previously sanctioned users like Fut Perf. I would also like to know how long the ban is for and why discussing formerly sanctioned users on a wiki project is seen as so dangerous or in need of a banning on a article page/s I never edited in the first place. Banning me from anything related to Macedonia for warning Greek wiki project page users over previous sanctioned members is akin to banning someone from driving for for disagreeing with speed humps and those who have been previously imprisoned for championing them. Thanks. Reaper7 (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your appeal is declined because it does not address the edits because of which you were banned (if anything, it inappropriately trivializes them), and it does not convince me that the conduct for which you were banned will not reoccur. If, as you say, you do not wish to edit articles, then Wikipedia is the wrong place for you in any case, because writing articles is sort of what we are here for. Sandstein 18:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to edit articles? Why an earth would you suggest that in response to me saying I barely touch the Macedonia pages? I was specifically and hugely ironically talking about the Macedonia pages I have not edited that you thought would be wise to ban me from. I could not have been clearer so why invent things in a passive aggressive manner? I came to your page with good faith. I have created and edited 100's of articles in my time, all free and clear to research if you would like. It will be far easier to research than the 3 times I have been in conflict with editors from other side of the Macedonia conflict in a total of 7 years. Perhaps you should have spent a little time investigating the editers I warned other editors to be aware of and the articles I have actually edited and created, rather than start off from a point of invention over who I am and why I edit? The fact that you suggested that I am not here to edit or write articles, I think that it will be hard to debate facts with you... I better go... Your comment against myself has little to do with reality and seems a little desperate and bad faithy. Hopefully this experience will make you curious for next time on the idea to investigate those who report as hard as those who are reported.. however I wont hold breath. It has been a miserable experience. Reaper7 (talk) 21:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Admin guidance on complex issue

I want to thank you for efforts to direct me in the right path. I have, for example, opened a dispute at WP:RSN and there appears to be clear consensus against using a comic-book in neutral voice of history. I am very new to English Wikipedia and have had another issue, which is more troubling, and I would appreciate your insightful comments on best ways of handling this complex issue. I am noting a couple admins so they see my attempts to improve future collaboration. MarciulionisHOF (talk) 18:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, from that link I can't see what exactly your edits for which Bishonen warned you were, but I agree with them that calling others antisemites is normally a personal attack, which are not acceptable here. So, my advice is, don't do it. Sandstein 18:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandstein: Certainly. The complexity involved here is that people, yourself included with the above comment, jump to the wrong conclusions based on nearsightedness and bad faith (no offense intended). I had linked to the discussion part, my diff above includes a link where I add the full explanation to my userpage. Thank you for your consideration. I am very much open to suggestions on improving this, in hopes that no one will assume I think one side or the other is evil. It is merely a longstanding dispute over self determination in the same territory. That people on both sides do terrible things cannot be disputed. That I have bad intentions and have called someone an antisemite, is wholly incorrect. Thanks in advance. MarciulionisHOF (talk) 19:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First update here. Probably far from perfect, but I think it makes progress. Let me know where else you think I can improve it to reduce (and/or quickly diffuse) bad-faith allegations. MarciulionisHOF (talk) 08:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you think I can or should do here as an admin. I'm not familiar with or interested in this topic, sorry. Sandstein 13:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No admin action was requested (or required). I wanted to know if the text clarifies to anyone in the future who might make bad faith assumptions and allege I want to smear the Palestinians as antisemitic/evil, that they basically jump to conclusion, possibly, due to not knowing the material well enough. An editor (myself included) should be allowed to mention some of the less appealing points in the Palestinian Muqawama (or the Israeli occupation) without being tarred and feathered. MarciulionisHOF (talk) 06:50, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your sanction decision?

For the last month, Jaqeli has been making hundreds of edits on numerous Georgia-related articles [1], even though he had a topic ban on Georgia and Armenia related articles imposed on 15th August [2]. Given that you re-imposed these sanctions (after you let him off his original sanctions), what are you going to do about this? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The ban only applies to topics related to both countries. If you think it has been violated, you can make an enforcement request at WP:AE with all required information, such as dated diffs. Sandstein 13:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to AE. Yes - sure - and give you another excuse to sanction me for no reason! Does the 1RR block you gave me for highlighting Jaqeli's violations consist of only topics related to both countries? Or am I under even heavier editing restrictions (if I were to edit a Georgia-related article that is not related to Armenia) than serial-offender Jaqeli? I ask just out of curiosity - I was not making more than 1 revert a day even before you gave out your pointless and vindictive sanction. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but the reason for any sanction is recorded on the user's talk page. If you have concerns about my sanctions, it might be better to ask another administrator to assist you. Sandstein 20:27, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You gave me the sanction, but cannot explain what its limits are? However, you are certain about the limits of the sanction you gave to Jaqueli at the same time. My question seemed clear. I assumed that Jaqueli was under editing restrictions for Georgia-related articles that have nothing directly to do with Armenia. You told me that he is not. I am asking you if I am under editing restrictions for Georgia-related articles that have nothing to do with Armenia? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember which, if any, sanctions apply to you. If you leave a link to the message imposing these sanctions, I might be able to clarify this. Sandstein 19:52, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tiptoethrutheminefield must be referring to this log entry. EdJohnston (talk) 16:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That restriction applies to pages that relate to the history of either Armenia or Georgia, that is, not only pages that relate to both countries. Sandstein 17:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom clarification request:Sexology (Tparis)

The request for clarification in whcih you were named has been closed and archived without action here for the arbitration committee --S Philbrick (Talk) 15:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Media Viewer RfC

You are being notified because you have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Alsee (talk) 19:40, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Logging a sanction

Hi Sandstein. Did you mean to record this block in the March 2014 section of the log? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that somehow ended up in the wrong position. Sandstein 16:29, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]