User talk:Andrevan/ArchivedTalkHistory: Difference between revisions

☕ A@📧mail ☕ 🐣c🐣 😎 💀d💀 😎 ⭐b⭐ 🧮 🗄️ 🧹

Contentious topics awareness

Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement. Try to stay in the top three sections of this hierarchy.

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

December 2023

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Be'eri massacre, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Dylanvt (talk) 15:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Nahal Oz attack, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Dylanvt (talk) 15:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

All your AFDs will be a speedy keep. WP:DTTR WP:POINT. Andre🚐 19:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Cool. Dylanvt (talk) 21:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

• Andrevan did nothing wrong. And yes, all the AFDs by Dylanvt are speedy keep. Especially when some are done a month after a "keep" decision was already made Facepalm. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 21:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, Oleg. Andre🚐 21:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Unnecessary commentary on an editor

This was fine up until Maybe you should actually study international law before you make wild speculations about what is or isn't covered by it. Please leave out the unnecessary commentary on editors. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: It's all good that you are volunteering to monitor some of the p-i contentious pages. But the most effective action that some Admins really need to take is to survey the talk page conduct of all editors across many pages. I think it will become evident that there is a group of editors who are routinely deflecting and blowing up discussion with sarcastic, off-topic personal disparagement and accusations of bad faith. Instead of us all needing to go through extended structured adjudication at AE or elsewhere, it would be much more effective and hightly efficient to give such disruptive editors warnings and then blocks if needed. Andrevan is one of the most level-headed, best-informed and civil editors in various difficult topics. He was recently brought to AE on a dubious charge by an editor who continued to engage in a provocative manner in the same subject, even while the AE was open. It's an odd spectacle to see Admins first volunteering their time, then complaining about how much time and attention it takes to do this in an inefficient and unproductive manner, when Admins are in fact authorized to do it much more directly and precisely at their discretion. Happy New Year, SFR. SPECIFICO talk 17:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

As I continue to read through talk page discussions with a total length greater than the Bible I will continue to give nudges and warnings, and take actions when I see a need.

Andre, I hope you don't see this as a stern warning, but rather as a gentle reminder to avoid unnecessary personalization to help stem escalations that can disrupt already fraught discussions. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

OK. Andre🚐 18:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Please review these comments [1] [2] [3] Andre🚐 18:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I already gave a warning for that earlier. Those particular comments were the only time I recall seeing them pop up so I didn't go with a more formal warning. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I see it now. Andre🚐 20:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

• Note for SFR, SPECIFICO, posterity and any helpful TPS, here's my apology for Iskandar getting the brunt of my late night rage [4] and a modification on the talk page [5] Andre🚐 20:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  Very helpful. One down, 11 to go.👩🏻 SPECIFICO talk 00:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  I appreciate that. Thank you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  and this? Falsely accusing me of making things up? Andre🚐 23:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  Been edited. Andre🚐 00:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

[6] for the ol' archives. Andre🚐 01:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

The part about the back and forth applies to you too, so please keep that in mind while discussing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely. You know it. Thanks. Time for a drink. Hope you're having a nice holiday. Andre🚐 01:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

[7] Andre🚐 02:07, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic banned from the Palestine/Israel conflict, broadly construed, for 90 days.

You have been sanctioned for WP:BATTLEGROUND editing.[8][9][10][11]

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

SFR, why shouldn't I appeal this? The diffs appear to me not violating - can you elaborate? And how come we ran up the pole of escalation from no logged warnings to 90 day topic ban? Is that standard? I have a mind to appeal, but I'd like some explanation first. Andre🚐 18:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see I was part of a group as a "equal representative" of "my side" to make it fair. But I'd still like to know how the diffs above show what you're saying. I appreciate the attempt to be even-handed. But my diffs above show an attempt to be conciliatory, not battlegrounding. So, I would appeal it, but I do want to know if I appeal it and it's overturned does that overturn the other topic bans? 'Cause obviously I find those more fair, which I guess was your point, and I applaud that point. But there's no need to sanction me to make it "fair." Andre🚐 18:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I'd be of a mind to NOT appeal and NOT need your response right now if it will help the other topic bans stick, so go deal with that first. I'll take a break for a while. Is there a statue of limitations on the appeal? Andre🚐 18:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)