User talk:Boothello: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SPA inquiry
Line 53: Line 53:
::I have read it a second time, thanks! It might benefit you to read this a second time: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Risker&diff=prev&oldid=425102972] [[User:Boothello|Boothello]] ([[User talk:Boothello#top|talk]]) 07:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
::I have read it a second time, thanks! It might benefit you to read this a second time: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Risker&diff=prev&oldid=425102972] [[User:Boothello|Boothello]] ([[User talk:Boothello#top|talk]]) 07:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
:::If you continue revert-warring and tag-teaming, then that might result in sanctions under [[WP:AE]]. I am not under any kind of formal editing restriction, except a self-imposed one on articles and their talk pages. It applies nowhere else, even if you or any of your friends would like to think so. Risker has explained that she has fully recused herself from anything related to the case, although she did vote once on a Request for amendment, perhaps as an oversight; I have privately sent messages about her comments to two members of ArbCom. If you wish to seek further clarification, you or your friend SightWatcher may make a formal Request for clarification. Meanwhile, please stop tag-teaming and edit-warring. Thanks, [[User:Mathsci|Mathsci]] ([[User talk:Mathsci|talk]]) 08:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
:::If you continue revert-warring and tag-teaming, then that might result in sanctions under [[WP:AE]]. I am not under any kind of formal editing restriction, except a self-imposed one on articles and their talk pages. It applies nowhere else, even if you or any of your friends would like to think so. Risker has explained that she has fully recused herself from anything related to the case, although she did vote once on a Request for amendment, perhaps as an oversight; I have privately sent messages about her comments to two members of ArbCom. If you wish to seek further clarification, you or your friend SightWatcher may make a formal Request for clarification. Meanwhile, please stop tag-teaming and edit-warring. Thanks, [[User:Mathsci|Mathsci]] ([[User talk:Mathsci|talk]]) 08:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

==Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Volunteer_Marek==
The nature of your editing is being considered at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Volunteer_Marek]] with respect to whether your account is a single purpose account which has edited in an aggressive and tendentious way with respect to the topic of race and intelligence. This expansion of the enforcement request resulted from the assertion by Volunteer Marek and others that your account was a single purpose account which edited and otherwise conducted themselves in a POV way. A preliminary look at your history of contributions shows that their contention may have merit. [[User:Fred Bauder]] [[User talk:Fred Bauder|Talk]] 02:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:48, 8 May 2011

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Boothello! I am WeijiBaikeBianji and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see we are editing some of the same articles.

Hi, Boothello, I see you haven't had time yet to set up your user page. It looks like you are watching several of the same articles I watch, and I look forward to you suggesting sources that will help me and other wikipedians improve the content of those various articles. You may or may not be aware that several of those articles were recently the subject of an Arbitration Committee case that resulted in those articles being subject to active arbitration remedies that continue to this day. I have been pleased to observe that editors who by no means share the same point of view on the underlying issues have nonetheless been able to learn how to communicate with one another and how to verify sources together as we all edit those various articles and improve their quality. I look forward to you keeping an eye on my editing of those articles and welcome you to comment about any of my edits on my user talk page or on the appropriate article talk page. And please suggest sources as you become aware of those—improving the sourcing of articles looks to be one of the best ways to improve most of the 6,820,359 articles on Wikipedia. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong place for complaint

You put a complaint on the talk page for Race and intelligence, but you were complaining about changes for the talk page for Race (classification of humans). Plus if you want to complain about something like that WP:AN/I is the place to go. Dmcq (talk) 01:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

user:Jagiello

Thanks for the information! Unfortunately I do not know who could possibly be the sockpuppeteer. If anyone is. A SPI requires some specific suspicions regarding another editor so I do not think I can start a SPI.Miradre (talk) 05:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invite

This may be of interest to you. Lionel (talk) 00:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BLP issues

I commented but it was deleted by Volunteer Marek. You can see it here: [1] Miradre (talk) 08:31, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mathsci's involvement in race articles

I just asked a member of Arbcom about Mathsci's current involvement in race articles, [2] since Mathsci has promised to permanently stay out of these articles was a condition for his topic ban being lifted in December. I feel that Mathsci's dominating of Miradre's noticeboard threads is unhelpful so I'm notifying some other people who have been involved in those. Risker suggested that this is dealt with in an arbitration amendment thread. I haven't been involved recently, so I don't think I'm the right person to request an amendment. But I think the rest of you might want to consider Risker's suggestion, if Mathsci continues to be this heavily involved.-SightWatcher (talk) 00:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts? Personally I think it may be best for now to just inform Mathsci about this discussion and hope that he desists voluntarily.Miradre (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the talk page of Risker for my response. Mathsci (talk) 01:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see how possible meatpuppetry by other affects your promise to stay out of these articles. By posting here you have shown that you are now aware of the issue raised by SightWatcher. I hope you will follow your earlier promise and stay out of the area.Miradre (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Boothello has not responded here, despite having edited wikipedia since SightWatcher posted.[3] Presumably there is a completely logical explanation. Mathsci (talk) 06:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing to respond to. An arbitrator has asked you stay out of the topic, and I consider the issue resolved. Curiously, I notice that user:Ramdrake has reverted my edit around ten minutes after you linked to it here, [4] despite having edited very little recently. I wonder if he's being contacted off-Wiki by someone currently involved.Boothello (talk) 07:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Were you expecting SightWatcher to post a message like the above on your page?
As far as I am aware Ramdrake has been in very poor health for well over a year. It is something of a relief that he is still well enough to edit wikipedia. Mathsci (talk) 07:31, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

tb

Hello, Boothello. You have new messages at Volunteer Marek's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redheylin (talk) 21:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC) answered your note Redheylin (talk) 21:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

informational note about ARBCOMR&I and discretionary sanctions

On the off chance that you are not aware, articles like Race and Intelligence are subject to discretionary sanctions. Please review the section on the ArbCom page for details: [5]. Cheers. aprock (talk) 02:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Aprock's message again, particularly the link. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 07:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have read it a second time, thanks! It might benefit you to read this a second time: [6] Boothello (talk) 07:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you continue revert-warring and tag-teaming, then that might result in sanctions under WP:AE. I am not under any kind of formal editing restriction, except a self-imposed one on articles and their talk pages. It applies nowhere else, even if you or any of your friends would like to think so. Risker has explained that she has fully recused herself from anything related to the case, although she did vote once on a Request for amendment, perhaps as an oversight; I have privately sent messages about her comments to two members of ArbCom. If you wish to seek further clarification, you or your friend SightWatcher may make a formal Request for clarification. Meanwhile, please stop tag-teaming and edit-warring. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 08:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Volunteer_Marek

The nature of your editing is being considered at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Volunteer_Marek with respect to whether your account is a single purpose account which has edited in an aggressive and tendentious way with respect to the topic of race and intelligence. This expansion of the enforcement request resulted from the assertion by Volunteer Marek and others that your account was a single purpose account which edited and otherwise conducted themselves in a POV way. A preliminary look at your history of contributions shows that their contention may have merit. User:Fred Bauder Talk 02:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]