User talk:Pablothepenguin/Archive 13
 | This 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. |
| Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:33, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
May 2017
Your recent editing history at Scottish local elections, 2017 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Do you have any sources to prove your claims that the results provided by the BBC are "fraudulent"? Mélencron (talk) 16:00, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- no, but I saw an article which said that results weren't in until six o clock.Pablothepenguin (talk) 16:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- Perhaps that refers to the time at which all councils are in as opposed to each individual council? In any case, the results for the two councils you reverted have already published their results. Mélencron (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- No, it definitely refers to specific councils
- Could you provide a link to the article? The results for every council are now in, they've been gradually rolling in all day. Mélencron (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- I hereby officially apologise for actions today, I'll look at anti-vandalism services now. Pablothepenguin (talk) 17:35, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- Could you provide a link to the article? The results for every council are now in, they've been gradually rolling in all day. Mélencron (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
- No, it definitely refers to specific councils
- Perhaps that refers to the time at which all councils are in as opposed to each individual council? In any case, the results for the two councils you reverted have already published their results. Mélencron (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Category:2010s Scottish film stubs has been nominated for discussion
Category:2010s Scottish film stubs, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:42, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Violation of topic ban. Thank you.--Atlan (talk) 09:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- As this edit is basically the same as this one, with not just arguing over Scottish politics but throwing mild personal attacks into edit summaries, you are re-blocked indefinitely. However, I see you have tried to contact a number of editors for adoption / mentoring, and if an experienced mentor confirms they are willing to adopt, I may be able to consider an unblock on those conditions. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:36, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333, I was actually trying to adopt less experienced users, not the other way round. Please allow me to continue doing this, I thought my topic ban had expired, I forgot that it was indefinite. Should I post an unblock request soon, and when is the best time to do this. Please also note, that I am also trying to get an instructor at the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy. I need to do this to give my existence on Wikipedia real meaning. Thank you. Pablothepenguin (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
You should not be mentoring anybody - rather you need to get an experienced editor to mentor you. You can file an unblock request at any time by adding {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to your talk page (and replacing the text "Your reason here..." with the actual request) and an uninvolved administrator will look at it. Please read the guide to appealing blocks first; in particular you have now been blocked for the same problems twice by two completely independent admins, and that issue will need to be addressed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:53, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- He already had a mentor (User:Samtar). It didn't work out.--Atlan (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- I will have a think, and post an unblock Request later today. Also, I believe that the issue with Samtar is that he was rather busy and forgot about me. I would imagine that getting another mentor after being unblocked will really help me out. Pablothepenguin (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have worked with Samtar on a number of RfAs so I am aware he's taken an extended wikibreak. You can see a list of available adopters here. Looking down the list, I would personally recommend MrX, Titodutta and CaroleHenson as editors I trust to be experienced enough in the full gamut of Wikipedia policies. If any of these agree adoption, I can entertain an unblock, but I'm not going to demand any of them do so and if none of them want to do it, then deal's off, sorry. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333, please can you notify those three people, I can't do it while I'm blocked?Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- They have already been notified by the pings I put in my previous comment. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Pablo came to my talk page a couple weeks ago and asked me to mentor him in anti-vandalism training. I declined then as I was too busy, but I do think that a good mentor could really help him, and if a mentor is found, he could be unblocked. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 14:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: I refer to the below unblock request. Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Pablo came to my talk page a couple weeks ago and asked me to mentor him in anti-vandalism training. I declined then as I was too busy, but I do think that a good mentor could really help him, and if a mentor is found, he could be unblocked. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 14:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- They have already been notified by the pings I put in my previous comment. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333, please can you notify those three people, I can't do it while I'm blocked?Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have worked with Samtar on a number of RfAs so I am aware he's taken an extended wikibreak. You can see a list of available adopters here. Looking down the list, I would personally recommend MrX, Titodutta and CaroleHenson as editors I trust to be experienced enough in the full gamut of Wikipedia policies. If any of these agree adoption, I can entertain an unblock, but I'm not going to demand any of them do so and if none of them want to do it, then deal's off, sorry. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Unblock Request
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I wish to find a mentor through the adoption programme. I feel this would be a good way to develop my skills on wiki, and deal with vandalism as it occurs. I wish to note that this is also an important step to help me gain a better position at Wikipedia. I am ideally looking for rollback rights at the end of this process to show that I am indeed capable of dealing with anti-vandalism tasks. While it is not my primary objective here, if I spend the next several thousand edits doing constructive anti-vandalism related things, I may wish to apply for adminship someday. This may be many years away, but at least it will always remain a possibility. I must start this new chapter in Wikipedia life by gaining access to a mentor. I can only do this with an unblock thank you very much. Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Ps, I am indeed aware of what I did wrong this time. I am imposing very strict requirements on myself not to even read articles which may provoke bad editing practices. Thusly, I may end up with a slightly narrower list of topics than ideal. Please accept my apologies for previous behaviour, it will not reoccur. Thank you. Pablothepenguin (talk) 21:27, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Based simply on the requests below alone, where you are pinging Ritchie333 and accusing him of "ignoring you", I'm declining this request. It appears you still haven't learned from your actions, as you haven't given an editor an HOUR before you say that they are "aggravating" you. This does not bode well for any mentoring that will take place in my opinion. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:54, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
| Aplogies for this pinging, it wasn't big and it wasn't clever. I do not wish to have it here anymore |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
@Ritchie333:Please respond to my unblock request. I know your active at the moment. Pablothepenguin (talk) 11:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC) @Ritchie333:Please stop ignoring me and respond to the unblock request. Don't aggravate me please. Pablothepenguin (talk) 12:26, 16 May 2017 (UTC) |
Unblock request 2
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I really would benefit from mentoring. I'm pretty sure the blocking administrator agrees with this. I'm sorry for pinging him too much, but it has been more than an hour with the request being made yesterday afternoon. i have learnt from my mistakes. I don't know what was being thought, but I'm sure that I deserve another chance. Pablothepenguin (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Given the edit-warring on a page covered by the topic ban, with insults to other editors, and following a discussion in the unblock IRC channel, I do not see that the issues that led to the block have been sufficiently addressed. The standard offer may be a way forward. Huon (talk) 18:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
1) I have a life outside Wikipedia, and since it involves getting paid and having fun with my family, it takes priority. 2) Unblock requests are best reviewed by an independent administrator. If you run out of patience, you run the risk of your talk page access being disabled. Chill. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:53, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- I understand, @Ritchie333:, I'll take that into consideration. It's taking a while for my unblock request to be reviewed, isn't it. Any suggestions to get a faster response? Pablothepenguin (talk) 23:59, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333:, Remember that I still have an ongoing unblock request. Pablothepenguin (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Request 3
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I really would benefit from mentoring. I'm pretty sure the blocking administrator agrees with this. I'm sorry for pinging him too much, but it has been more than an hour with the request being made yesterday afternoon. i have learnt from my mistakes. I don't know what was being thought, but I'm sure that I deserve another chance. I also wish to state that I will refrain from even reading pages which may provoke me to vandalise the wiki. I do deserve another chance for the purpose of being an anti vandalism expert. I will head a mentor and I will promise not to do anything unjust ever again, and will monitor more closely my actions on my account.Pablothepenguin (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Procedural decline You had two open requests at the same time, both date stamped as as 13:58 16 May. The request has now been declined by Huon above, and the standard offer provided. Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Request 4
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I wish to find a mentor through the adoption programme. I feel this would be a good way to develop my skills on wiki, and deal with vandalism as it occurs. I wish to note that this is also an important step to help me gain a better position at Wikipedia. I am also keen on providing new information for articles on subjects like Brighton Pier and various musical things. I am also keen on writing new articles for subjects that would benefit from them. My main goal on Wikipedia is to improve the content which is there and make sure that vandalism is dealt with as soon as possible. I am ideally looking for rollback rights at the end of this process to show that I am indeed capable of dealing with anti-vandalism tasks. While it is not my primary objective here, if I spend the next several thousand edits doing constructive anti-vandalism related things, I may wish to apply for adminship someday. This may be many years away, but at least it will always remain a possibility. I must start this new chapter in Wikipedia life by gaining access to a mentor. I can only do this with an unblock thank you very much.
Ps, I am indeed aware of what I did wrong this time. I am imposing very strict requirements on myself not to even read articles which may provoke bad editing practices. Thusly, I may end up with a slightly narrower list of topics than ideal. Please accept my apologies for previous behaviour, it will not reoccur. Thank you. Pablothepenguin (talk) 19:08, 25 May 2017 (UTC).
Decline reason:
You were previously indefinitely blocked after violating your topic ban (which was initially imposed here), and you were unblocked on the conditions that:
- Your topic ban on "all editing on Scotland in relation to Great Britain/United Kingdom, broadly construed" is extended to indefinite. Note that indefinite is not infinite. You may make an appeal to the community after six months.
- Further violations of your topic ban will result in reinstatement of your indefinite block.
You blatantly broke your agreement and again violated your topic ban, and you were abusive to other editors. And you do not need a mentor to teach you how not to do that.
As for "I am imposing very strict requirements on myself not to even read articles which may provoke bad editing practices", you said almost exactly the same thing last November when you were unblocked: "I am avoiding certain articles which may trigger me to compromise the topic ban or anything remotely close to this", and I see no reason to believe you this time when you reneged on it last time.
Huon has recommended the WP:Standard Offer, and I think that is the best you are likely to get at this point. So stay away for the minimum 6 months, then make an unblock appeal that convinces a reviewer that you fully understand the problems that led to your block and that they will not be repeated. If that is successful, if you want a mentor you can seek one then. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Adoption offers
I see that, prior to your latest block, you have been offering to adopt/mentor other editors. In the light of the above and your obvious unsuitability to be mentoring anyone, that really adds to my doubts about your competence to be editing Wikipedia at all. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:19, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 9 June 2017
- From the editors: Signpost status: On reserve power, help wanted!
- News and notes: Global Elections
- Arbitration report: Cases closed in the Pacific and with Magioladitis
- Featured content: Three months in the land of the featured
- In the media: Did Wikipedia just assume Garfield's gender?
- Recent research: Wikipedia bot wars capture the imagination of the popular press
- Technology report: Tech news catch-up
- Traffic report: Film on Top: Sampling the weekly top 10
The Signpost: 23 June 2017
- News and notes: Departments reorganized at Wikimedia Foundation, and a month without new RfAs (so far)
- In the media: Kalanick's nipples; Episode #138 of Drama on the Hill
- Op-ed: Facto Post: a fresh take
- Featured content: Will there ever be a break? The slew of featured content continues
- Traffic report: Wonder Woman beats Batman, The Mummy, Darth Vader and the Earth
- Technology report: Improved search, and WMF data scientist tells all
The Signpost: 15 July 2017
- News and notes: French chapter woes, new affiliates and more WMF team changes
- Featured content: Spectacular animals, Pine Trees screens, and more
- In the media: Concern about access and fairness, Foundation expenditures, and relationship to real-world politics and commerce
- Recent research: The chilling effect of surveillance on Wikipedia readers
- Gallery: A mix of patterns
- Humour: The Infobox Game
- Traffic report: Film, television and Internet phenomena reign with some room left over for America's birthday
- Technology report: New features in development; more breaking changes for scripts
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 3 wrap-up
Note to self
Add new countries when account is unblocked. Pablothepenguin (talk) 00:22, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 5 August 2017
- Recent research: Wikipedia can increase local tourism by +9%; predicting article quality with deep learning; recent behavior predicts quality
- WikiProject report: Comic relief
- In the media: Wikipedia used to judge death penalty, arms smuggling, Indonesian governance, and HOTTEST celebrity
- Traffic report: Swedish countess tops the list
- Featured content: Everywhere in the lead
- Technology report: Introducing TechCom
- Humour: WWASOHs and ETCSSs
The Signpost: 6 September 2017
- From the editors: What happened at Wikimania?
- News and notes: Basselpedia; WMF Board of Trustees appointments
- Featured content: Warfighters and their tools or trees and butterflies
- Traffic report: A fortnight of conflicts
- Special report: Biomedical content, and some thoughts on its future
- Recent research: Discussion summarization; Twitter bots tracking government edits; extracting trivia from Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: WikiProject YouTube
- Technology report: Latest tech news
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 4 wrap-up
- Humour: Bots
The Signpost: 25 September 2017
- News and notes: Chapter updates; ACTRIAL
- Humour: Chickenz
- Recent research: Wikipedia articles vs. concepts; Wikipedia usage in Europe
- Technology report: Flow restarted; Wikidata connection notifications
- Gallery: Chicken mania
- Traffic report: Fights and frights
- Featured content: Flying high
The Signpost: 23 October 2017
- News and notes: Money! WMF fundraising, Wikimedia strategy, WMF new office!
- Featured content: Don, Marcel, Emily, Jessica and other notables
- Humour: Guys named Ralph
- In the media: Facebook and poetry
- Special report: Working with GLAMs in the UK
- Traffic report: Death, disaster, and entertainment
The Signpost: 24 November 2017
- News and notes: Cons, cons, cons
- Arbitration report: Administrator desysoped; How to deal with crosswiki issues; Mister Wiki case likely
- Technology report: Searching and surveying
- Interview: A featured article centurion
- WikiProject report: Recommendations for WikiProjects
- In the media: Open knowledge platform as a media institution
- Traffic report: Strange and inappropriate
- Featured content: We will remember them
- Recent research: Who wrote this? New dataset on the provenance of Wikipedia text
Unblock Request
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Dear Admins, it has been nearly seven months since I was blocked. I have greatly improved myself in this time. I no longer expect to get unhappy enough to vandalise a page on Wikipedia. I am now ready to accept the standard offer, so please consider this in your judgement. Finally, I close by saying that I would like to get a mentor after I am unblocked, if you could assist with this, that would be very ideal. Thank you. Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:50, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You've been indef'ed three times, and blocked three times for violating your topic ban. The fact you didn't even address your topic ban in this unblock request tells me that we are going to be right back to this point if an unblock is granted. To be blunt, I feel like the community has given you plenty of "last chances". RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:10, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
You are blocked for violating your topic ban, but haven't addressed this at all in your unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 14:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Assuming the ban still applies (best to confirm this with me), I certainly will never ever violate it again, I admit that I was stupid back then, and broke it unnecessarily, but I can assure you those days are over. Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:50, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- It would be, and with seven blocks, all for either edit warring or violating a topic ban, I'm unsure its really worth the potential time sink of unblocking you just to be blocked again.. I could possibly support an unblock on the proviso that it really is the last time we'll consider an unblock request? -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 14:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- I don’t think I’ll be blocked ever again, I hope to put in many years of service, and I hope I can transform myself to be a top anti-vandalism editor. Unfortunately I don’t think I’m admin material, but I’m not bothered about that anyway. And yes, if I really do get where I want to go I can look into being an admin, but only if I can stop making a fool of myself with these blocks. So, an Unblock would be very ideal, remembering that I will immediately try to get a mentor, surely you can help with this? Pablothepenguin (talk) 14:57, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- It would be, and with seven blocks, all for either edit warring or violating a topic ban, I'm unsure its really worth the potential time sink of unblocking you just to be blocked again.. I could possibly support an unblock on the proviso that it really is the last time we'll consider an unblock request? -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 14:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
A more Detailed Request
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
As I have said above, I would like to be unblocked so I can obtain a mentor and better my anti-vandalism abilities on Wikipedia. I can assure you that I will never infringe my topic ban ever again. I know I was stupid and I know I’ve had my moments of idiocy, put please consider that I really will change this time. I personally think that I will never even look at a page that has anything to do with the topic ban, I feel that I should be given one final chance to prove myself once and for all, especially as I am getting much better at dealing with stress. I must be able to improve articles of local interest and I must also work on articles for other places I like. I need a mentor and I need one final chance. So, please understand that I have now addressed the topic ban and remember that the original blocking Admin should be allowed to give his opinion here of this unblock request. Pablothepenguin (talk) 15:18, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The discussion below shows that were not even aware of the terms of your topic ban, and that you openly intend to flout it if unblocked. So no, I am not in any way satisfied that you have addressed the topic ban. Yunshui 雲水 08:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- What was the original topic ban? Also, I think it best if you keep to 1RR in the future. And using civil edit summaries, of course. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:22, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Good points there! I believe the topic ban was to do with Scottish Politics. Pablothepenguin (talk) 15:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- If you do not understand the nature of the topic ban, and I see no reason why that should be lifted now, it would be hard to unblock you with the expectation of you adhering to said topic ban. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:45, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- I can assure you I do understand the nature of the topic ban, I’m just not very good at wording it very well. It was Scottish Politics, with a particular emphasis on its political relationship with the UK. Pablothepenguin (talk) 15:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- I see. And what are articles of local interest, and other articles you like? -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Local interest for me would be anything on the subject of Southwestern Scotland, I also like other places too, like Brighton and Hove, and the Scottish Highlands, and possibly even Southampton. Pablothepenguin (talk) 16:01, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- FYI, for your topic ban it is "all editing on Scotland in relation to Great Britain/United Kingdom, broadly construed", not just Scottish Politics. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Ok then, I must not have remembered it 100% correctly, thank you for reminding me, I’ll bear that in mind. Pablothepenguin (talk) 18:40, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- FYI, for your topic ban it is "all editing on Scotland in relation to Great Britain/United Kingdom, broadly construed", not just Scottish Politics. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Local interest for me would be anything on the subject of Southwestern Scotland, I also like other places too, like Brighton and Hove, and the Scottish Highlands, and possibly even Southampton. Pablothepenguin (talk) 16:01, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- I see. And what are articles of local interest, and other articles you like? -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- I can assure you I do understand the nature of the topic ban, I’m just not very good at wording it very well. It was Scottish Politics, with a particular emphasis on its political relationship with the UK. Pablothepenguin (talk) 15:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- If you do not understand the nature of the topic ban, and I see no reason why that should be lifted now, it would be hard to unblock you with the expectation of you adhering to said topic ban. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:45, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Good points there! I believe the topic ban was to do with Scottish Politics. Pablothepenguin (talk) 15:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
For reference, it was originally applied here. See WP:RESTRICT for the current status. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:27, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Let it be noted that the six months timer will commence on unblock'. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:53, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
standard offer
@Ritchie333: Ignoring the tone of the most recent unblock request, what do you think? -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:38, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- That is to say, SO with aforementioned TBAN. TBAN to be reviewed 6 months on.13:49, 5 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlohcierekim (talk • contribs)
- IF it's OK, @Ritchie333:, I would like to unblock with the understanding that the TBAN remains in place. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- In general terms, you don't need to ask my permission to unblock if you have a solid case. If Pablo is happy to take the full topic ban of Scotland, then we can unblock, with the understanding that if he violates the ban again, he's probably run out of WP:ROPE. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:40, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- It would be unwise in my opinion, Dlohcierekim, to unblock with the current TBAN in place - I strongly suggest it is increased to cover Scotland in general, broadly construed -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 12:47, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333 and Dlohcierekim: It's not clear even to me exactly what Ritchie's "the aforementioned topic ban" and "the full topic ban of Scotland" refer to, and probably not to Pablo either. Note that the user protests above against There'sNoTime's proposal of a topic ban to cover Scotland in all aspects, broadly construed, because "articles on geographical features and settlements" are exactly what they want to edit (I'm pretty sure that means Scottish geographical features and settlements). In other words, they don't seem at all happy with "a full topic ban of Scotland". Or are you, Pablo? Would there be any point in unblocking you on condition of a topic ban from Scotland in all its aspects? Bishonen | talk 13:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC).
- @Bishonen: Okay, let's (in the words of Alan Sugar) get down to brass tacks. The problem with Pablo isn't really anything to do with Scotland or Scottish politics, and trying to define the scope of such a "broadly construed" topic ban is difficult when you get into grey areas. It's more to do with the fact that he likes to edit-war in discussion threads and gets upset when consensus doesn't go his way. So, as a complete alternative, why don't we just put him on a straight 1RR restriction and unblock. It's a bright line, it's obvious when it's been violated, and it more or less stops the problems that the topic ban was supposed to prevent, while also giving him free reign to write whatever articles he likes. How does that grab people? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- I would agree 1RR, as the condition for unblocking, sounds reasonable. I see no need to increase the scope of the TBAN, especially as it would cover an area editor now wishes to edit. Bishonen, how do you see it? Ritchie333, I new you would give valuable insight. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- If I can add, I agree with the idea of 1RR being put in place (not indefinitely of course), with the understanding that this is pretty much the end of the WP:ROPE we are giving. If Pablo can show that he can cooperate within the boundaries of 1RR after a amount of time to be determined, then it can be reviewed and removed if deemed to be a good idea. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Can we just do away with the original topic ban and replace it with 1RR? I think there's a legitimate argument to make that trying to topic ban everything to do with Scotland and GB / UK is too broad a brush. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:28, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- If I can add, I agree with the idea of 1RR being put in place (not indefinitely of course), with the understanding that this is pretty much the end of the WP:ROPE we are giving. If Pablo can show that he can cooperate within the boundaries of 1RR after a amount of time to be determined, then it can be reviewed and removed if deemed to be a good idea. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Okay, Pablo, agree to this deal and I will unblock (unless another admin gets to it first):
- You can only revert one edit per article per 24 hours.
- It doesn't matter if you don't hit the "undo" button, if you change somebody else's text back to the previous revision manually (whether in whole or in part), it counts as a "revert" for this purposes.
- Making a bold edit on an article counts as a "revert". If you change an article, or add something to it, and your edit is reverted, do not revert back as you will violate this restriction.
- If you try and game the system (ie: do two reverts just outside the 24 hour window), that will be treated as a violation
- There are limited exceptions, covered in Wikipedia:Edit warring#Exemptions. In particular, you can revert blatant and obvious vandalism and I'm happy for you to have general free reign over your talk page, so you can revert whatever you like on here, as long as it's not a declined unblock request (while you are still blocked).
- Any violation of the restriction will be met by an immediate indefinite block, at which point you should forget about editing Wikipedia for a very, very long time.
You should read Wikipedia:Edit warring#What edit warring is carefully. Additionally, should be aware (as Bishonen hints above) that some admins are lenient towards breaking restrictions based on context, others will block the minute they see two reverts on an article that are close enough together. Also, while I generally don't sanction on civility alone, if you skirt the line of 1RR with edit summaries like "Fuck you", you'll probably wind up getting blocked anyway. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
−
For context, link to original--
- TBAN-- "Since no one else has bothered so far - I am proposing a 6 month topic ban from the topics of Scotland & Great Britain/United Kingdom broadly construed. A quick look back at their editing history shows the Pro-Scottish independance view has caused their editing to be disruptive on more than one occasion. This MFD was a result of a series of edits annoying the ref desks. A pattern of editing that has resurfaced with his pointless arguments at the Google streetview page and the village pump." -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:22, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Agreement
I, Pablothepenguin, hereby do officially agree to the above one revert rule suggestions. I Antoine to them in every way possible and promise with my heart will not be violated. Pablothepenguin (talk) 18:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Third Request
Pablothepenguin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have never intended to flout the ban and I certainly do understand the terms of it. Why would anyone think otherwise. I am very offended by someone who is clearly not the blocking admin trying to pass judgement like this. I can assure you that I do not intend to flout the ban. I’m sorry if I didn’t remember it right but I certainly do now. Are you suggesting that my geographical subjects are violating this ban? I don’t see how they could be. I am not very good at wording things. The only edits I’ll do which relate to Scotland are matters of Geography independent of the topic ban. Please understand that I need a mentor. I’m sure that writing and editing articles about obscure place names and geographical features is an acceptable thing for me to do. With a mentor I can definitely improve. Pablothepenguin (talk) 12:35, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Accept reason:
See below conditions. 1RR restriction in place until 7 June 2018. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:18, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- What about if the topic ban was extended to cover Scotland in all aspects, broadly construed, given that it was the area which caused most of these blocks? -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 12:41, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- I understand what you say, but articles on geographical features and settlements have never caused me bother. These are things that I want to work on. Pablothepenguin (talk) 12:47, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry to have to ask this, but why is it taking so long for a response to my current unblock request? @Ritchie333: Pablothepenguin (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
- This may be the problem. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:04, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- User_talk:Pablothepenguin/Archive_11#Unblock_Request_2 may be a factor. The concern is that you will not adhere to the TBAN once unblocked. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:07, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry to have to ask this, but why is it taking so long for a response to my current unblock request? @Ritchie333: Pablothepenguin (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
- I understand what you say, but articles on geographical features and settlements have never caused me bother. These are things that I want to work on. Pablothepenguin (talk) 12:47, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Double Check
Can I just double check if this 1RR supersedes the Topic Ban, in other words, does the Topic Ban still apply or not, sorry to ask this but not very sure as the stuff on my Talk Page is a little unclear? Pablothepenguin (talk) 19:22, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- The ban is for "all editing on Scotland in relation to Great Britain/United Kingdom, broadly construed". To give you a couple of examples of how I think that should work - I've got no issue with you expanding Portobello Pier out from a stub or updating Marischal Square which has now opened. I think the admins above are happy with this being superseded with 1RR, but I don't believe you can get a consensus for removing it unless it gets discussed at the Administrators noticeboard. I would err on the side of assuming that it is still active and concurrent with the 1RR restriction. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 December 2017
- Special report: Women in Red World Contest wrap-up
- Featured content: Featured content to finish 2017
- In the media: Stolen seagulls, public domain primates and more
- Arbitration report: Last case of 2017: Mister Wiki editors
- Gallery: Wiki loving
- Recent research: French medical articles have "high rate of veracity"
- Technology report: Your wish lists and more Wikimedia tech
- Traffic report: Notable heroes and bad guys
It's all over
I am sorry to see what has happened to your rollback request. You are a victim of your past, your blocks. The only way of doing anti-vandalism for you is going to be WP:CLEANSTART. You have been a good student and sadly I am full of Wikipedia's inability to see people turn and become decent editors. My stay here is over, farewell Pablo. Cheers, FriyMan Per aspera ad astra 19:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| For the 42 contributions, that matter to you. Cheers, FriyMan Per aspera ad astra 19:10, 21 December 2017 (UTC) |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:34, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 January 2018
- News and notes: Communication is key
- In the media: The Paris Review, British Crown and British Media
- Featured content: History, gaming and multifarious topics
- Interview: Interview with Ser Amantio di Nicolao, the top contributor to English Wikipedia by edit count
- Technology report: Dedicated Wikidata database servers
- Arbitration report: Mister Wiki is first arbitration committee decision of 2018
- Traffic report: The best and worst of 2017
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:35, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:33, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 5 February 2018
- Featured content: Wars, sieges, disasters and everything black possible
- Traffic report: TV, death, sports, and doodles
- Special report: Cochrane–Wikipedia Initiative
- Arbitration report: New cases requested for inter-editor hostility and other collaboration issues
- In the media: Solving crime; editing out violence allegations
- Humour: You really are in Wonderland
The Signpost: 20 February 2018
- News and notes: The future is Swedish with a lack of administrators
- Recent research: Politically diverse editors write better articles; Reddit and Stack Overflow benefit from Wikipedia but don't give back
- Arbitration report: Arbitration committee prepares to examine two new cases
- Traffic report: Addicted to sports and pain
- Featured content: Entertainment, sports and history
- Technology report: Paragraph-based edit conflict screen; broken thanks
Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018
- News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.
- Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.
- Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers
- Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs
- Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.
- Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.
- Humour: WikiWorld Reruns
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 April 2018
- From the editors: The Signpost's presses roll again
- Signpost: Future directions for The Signpost
- In the media: The rise of Wikipedia as a disinformation mop
- In focus: Admin reports board under criticism
- Special report: ACTRIAL results adopted by landslide
- Community view: It's time we look past Women in Red to counter systemic bias
- Discussion report: The future of portals
- Arbitration report: No new cases, and one motion on administrative misconduct
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Military History
- Traffic report: A quiet place to wrestle with the articles of March
- Technology report: Coming soon: Books-to-PDF, interactive maps, rollback confirmation
- Featured content: Featured content selected by the community
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:35, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2018 (UTC)