Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change
You have a long history here and know that personal attacks are not acceptable. You have not had a personal attack block since 2009, please stop engaging in personal attacks or it will happen again. HighInBC 13:46, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
- Roger that. I have already expressed my outrage and got it out of my system. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Hillary Clinton email controversy is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBAP2
|This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Alerting you of the sanctions in view of a complaint about your edits at WP:AN3 (permanent link). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:32, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your feedback. But the edits made were sourced to even the same article that sources already allowed. If Ars Technica can not be a source, then it can not be a source, its ok. but Ars Technica is a source for what I post too. I think you should be balanced. Not allowing public relations from Liberty Media to own page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)