Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
Hello! I recently noticed that you decided to delete some sections from your talk page, instead of archiving them. Along with this, the content of these messages, specifically messages regarding editing warring, are used for administrative purposes. and while they are visible in the history of the page, it is better to archive them, so that they can be accessed easily by other members of the community.
Instead of sweeping it under the rug, it is better to apologize for your behavior, and to simply archive it.
Thanks,
Upsidedown Keyboard
(
talk)
00:05, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
In general, just be aware that notifying a single WikiProject is perfectly normal here and is not a sign of bad faith. After all, WikiProjects are not inherently biased communities, so WikiProject China is not a community of editors who support the governmental position of (the People’s Republic of / Republic of) China for instance. I recognize that of course, biases may exist within a given community, but an open neutral notification of a WikiProject should not be taken as canvassing editors of a given bias.
Also, don’t expect editors to have to respond to every rebuttal you offer. The first half of the essay at WP:SATISFY covers it pretty well (and the bludgeoning section above it). Editors get tired of re-explaining their stance when they feel it is still valid in spite of repeated challenges to the contrary (which they may feel are not valid). I offer this (unprompted) advice because I am guilty of this at times, and it is something good to be aware of.
I hope that our disagreements on this fairly minor content point does not leave an overwhelmingly negative feeling. I also hope that this unprompted advice (maybe unwanted advice) does not come off as aggressive or accusational - I’m just giving an honest two cents here! I appreciate your edits here since joining and I hope we can constructively collaborate in the future. — MarkH21 ( talk) 08:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Flaughtin. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about in the page
Bitter Winter , you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Grayfell ( talk) 03:37, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
— Bagumba ( talk) 23:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I have undone part of your edit [2] in my new edit here [3]. Let me know what you think of my edit. Geographyinitiative ( talk) 11:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
I saw this edit summary go past: [6].
You seem to be getting pretty frustrated! If you'll take advice from a stranger; maybe take a break for a bit. :-/ The article might be a bit wrong today, but can still be fixed tomorrow, after all.
It's good to see people using BRD. Do note though that one can't force people to follow one's particular interpretation of WP:BRD (or even mine)! All you can do is apply it as a method to get people to cooperate.
All I can say is take care, stay frosty, and hopefully things will be better tomorrow? This is becoming a rather busy article, folks are going to need all their diplomatic wiles!
-- Kim Bruning ( talk) 05:26, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
You're not reverting sockpuppet edits but edits by the sockmaster made before they were blocked, thus that is not a sufficient reason to revert them. If the sockmaster is blocked, edits by the sock can be reverted, see WP:EVASION. Doug Weller talk 17:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
The following sanction now applies to you:
Flaughtin is topic banned from pages and discussions related to the China-United States trade war, broadly construed, for a period of 6 months.
You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this ANI thread.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. 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. — Wug· a·po·des 04:49, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
ST47 (
talk)
00:05, 20 December 2020 (UTC)Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
Hello! I recently noticed that you decided to delete some sections from your talk page, instead of archiving them. Along with this, the content of these messages, specifically messages regarding editing warring, are used for administrative purposes. and while they are visible in the history of the page, it is better to archive them, so that they can be accessed easily by other members of the community.
Instead of sweeping it under the rug, it is better to apologize for your behavior, and to simply archive it.
Thanks,
Upsidedown Keyboard
(
talk)
00:05, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
In general, just be aware that notifying a single WikiProject is perfectly normal here and is not a sign of bad faith. After all, WikiProjects are not inherently biased communities, so WikiProject China is not a community of editors who support the governmental position of (the People’s Republic of / Republic of) China for instance. I recognize that of course, biases may exist within a given community, but an open neutral notification of a WikiProject should not be taken as canvassing editors of a given bias.
Also, don’t expect editors to have to respond to every rebuttal you offer. The first half of the essay at WP:SATISFY covers it pretty well (and the bludgeoning section above it). Editors get tired of re-explaining their stance when they feel it is still valid in spite of repeated challenges to the contrary (which they may feel are not valid). I offer this (unprompted) advice because I am guilty of this at times, and it is something good to be aware of.
I hope that our disagreements on this fairly minor content point does not leave an overwhelmingly negative feeling. I also hope that this unprompted advice (maybe unwanted advice) does not come off as aggressive or accusational - I’m just giving an honest two cents here! I appreciate your edits here since joining and I hope we can constructively collaborate in the future. — MarkH21 ( talk) 08:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Flaughtin. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about in the page
Bitter Winter , you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Grayfell ( talk) 03:37, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
— Bagumba ( talk) 23:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I have undone part of your edit [2] in my new edit here [3]. Let me know what you think of my edit. Geographyinitiative ( talk) 11:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
I saw this edit summary go past: [6].
You seem to be getting pretty frustrated! If you'll take advice from a stranger; maybe take a break for a bit. :-/ The article might be a bit wrong today, but can still be fixed tomorrow, after all.
It's good to see people using BRD. Do note though that one can't force people to follow one's particular interpretation of WP:BRD (or even mine)! All you can do is apply it as a method to get people to cooperate.
All I can say is take care, stay frosty, and hopefully things will be better tomorrow? This is becoming a rather busy article, folks are going to need all their diplomatic wiles!
-- Kim Bruning ( talk) 05:26, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
You're not reverting sockpuppet edits but edits by the sockmaster made before they were blocked, thus that is not a sufficient reason to revert them. If the sockmaster is blocked, edits by the sock can be reverted, see WP:EVASION. Doug Weller talk 17:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
The following sanction now applies to you:
Flaughtin is topic banned from pages and discussions related to the China-United States trade war, broadly construed, for a period of 6 months.
You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this ANI thread.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. 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. — Wug· a·po·des 04:49, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
ST47 (
talk)
00:05, 20 December 2020 (UTC)