![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
==Notice: sanctions apply to Gamergate controversy topics==
Please read this notification carefully:
A
community discussion has authorised the use of
general sanctions for pages related to the
Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described
here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 22:46, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure I see what you're referring to on the evidence page when you say I edited your comments. I did not intentionally change anything in your comments and I don't actually see what the change was supposed to do or why I would make it. It was most likely just something that got fouled up as I was typing in my commentary somehow. In any case it wasn't purposeful and I apologize if you found it alarming. ReynTime ( talk) 20:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 ( talk) 03:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Harsh 2580. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Jagapati, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Harsh (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States House Select Committee on Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Am I not allowed to point out to someone that there are formatting errors on an article that if I were to actually edit there'd be a collective aneurism on Reddit?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 03:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Michael Brown. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 hostage rescue operations in Yemen. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Battle of Chawinda. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
I've redacted our conversation, removed the link to Reddit (even though it's deleted now), and closed the thread. I don't think it's a major issue, but I see your point. Let me know if there's anything I've forgotten. Black Kite (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Editorial team. There's also nothing on Wikipedia that says that all reliable sources must have a "posted editorial policy" nor does the fact that it's not on WP:VG/RS qualify because 8chan is not a video game. Not to mention, we use it extensively already.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 20:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
A video game site not reliable for video games means its reliability for other topics is also in question.from my last edit summary. All reliable sources do not require a posted editorial policy, but editorial control and corrections (or a statement that they make them) are important things looked for in identifying reliable sources. Just because the site is sourced elsewhere on Wikipedia already does not mean it's reliable. Also
Whether a specific news story is reliable for a specific fact or statement in a Wikipedia article should be assessed on a case-by-case basisWP:NEWSORG. Since we've both passed 3RR at this point let's agree to stop fighting over this on the article for now and discuss it. I'd implore you to take gameranx to WP:RSN, I won't even post there, let others decide if it's good enough and then I won't fight it. Weedwacker ( talk) 20:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
==Notice: sanctions apply to Gamergate controversy topics==
Please read this notification carefully:
A
community discussion has authorised the use of
general sanctions for pages related to the
Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described
here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 22:46, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure I see what you're referring to on the evidence page when you say I edited your comments. I did not intentionally change anything in your comments and I don't actually see what the change was supposed to do or why I would make it. It was most likely just something that got fouled up as I was typing in my commentary somehow. In any case it wasn't purposeful and I apologize if you found it alarming. ReynTime ( talk) 20:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 ( talk) 03:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Harsh 2580. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Jagapati, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Harsh (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States House Select Committee on Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Am I not allowed to point out to someone that there are formatting errors on an article that if I were to actually edit there'd be a collective aneurism on Reddit?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 03:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Michael Brown. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 hostage rescue operations in Yemen. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Battle of Chawinda. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
I've redacted our conversation, removed the link to Reddit (even though it's deleted now), and closed the thread. I don't think it's a major issue, but I see your point. Let me know if there's anything I've forgotten. Black Kite (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Editorial team. There's also nothing on Wikipedia that says that all reliable sources must have a "posted editorial policy" nor does the fact that it's not on WP:VG/RS qualify because 8chan is not a video game. Not to mention, we use it extensively already.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜) 20:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
A video game site not reliable for video games means its reliability for other topics is also in question.from my last edit summary. All reliable sources do not require a posted editorial policy, but editorial control and corrections (or a statement that they make them) are important things looked for in identifying reliable sources. Just because the site is sourced elsewhere on Wikipedia already does not mean it's reliable. Also
Whether a specific news story is reliable for a specific fact or statement in a Wikipedia article should be assessed on a case-by-case basisWP:NEWSORG. Since we've both passed 3RR at this point let's agree to stop fighting over this on the article for now and discuss it. I'd implore you to take gameranx to WP:RSN, I won't even post there, let others decide if it's good enough and then I won't fight it. Weedwacker ( talk) 20:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |