Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:11, 11 June 2024

genocide

If it is determined that Israel and Hamas committed genocide, what will the articles Palestinian genocide accusation and Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel be renamed to? The first one is not only about the war in Gaza. Parham wiki (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

That isnt something I would decide, as Misplaced Pages has yet to anoint me to my rightful place of arbiter of all content. nableezy - 16:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Hmm I thought about proposing that in our cabal, but I have yet to see you edit (and adjudicate) K-pop and rasslin' content. Drmies (talk) 02:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

lol, I spend enough time on Misplaced Pages to get in to K-pop fights. Guess Ill fail my review at the annual overlords of Misplaced Pages meeting. nableezy - 02:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Edits by a user you previously have dealings with.

Just wondering how to go about something like this where the user goes out of their way to add their own analysis, outside of what is in the linked article. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 20:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:MUTUAL proposal

I forgot to ping in my comment, but I propose we do a WP:MUTUAL removal and basically delete the entire "BBC Synth issue" split-discussion I started. The issue is solved and it turned into my getting to hot-headed. It is just us in the small discussion threat, so MUTUAL is a valid option. So, would you agree to my proposal? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

• As a note, I want to back away from the discussion, except that ORN, since that is now a true curiosity I have now. But the main attack talk page debate, I want to drop the stick and back away from. A mutual deletion will honestly help me do that. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
• What Id prefer is you started treating these discussion pages as something other than a place to shoot the shit and started treating it like a place where grownups discuss how to improve encyclopedia articles. I dont really give a shit what you do with that section, and tbh Ive already muted your pings as I find the practice of pinging somebody to a discussion you know they are watching to be more annoying than useful. nableezy - 17:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:1RR at Al-Sardi school attack

1. 16:58, 11 June 2024 (Taking content that an editor put in Wikivoice and attributing it is partially undoing their actions)
2. 15:25, 11 June 2024 (Removing content that an editor added is undoing their actions)

Please self-revert 16:58, 11 June 2024. BilledMammal (talk) 17:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I do not think number 1 is a revert by any definition of the term revert. Feel free to report it, but Ill be asking that you be banned from AE for making tendentious reports if/when you do. nableezy - 17:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

To use an example from the discussion at ScottishFinnishRadishs talkpage; an editor adds "BilledMammal is a platypus". Their action is to add, in Wikivoice, this claim. If another editor comes along and then attributes this claim - "According to BilledMammal, BilledMammal is a platypus" - then they have undone the action to put the claim in Wikivoice and so have made a revert.

SFR, since I'm pinging you anyway, can you comment on this? BilledMammal (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Again, that isnt a revert, that is an edit. I also do not think admin-shopping is an appropriate tactic here either. I dont think youd appreciate me pinging Ealdgyth who has now multiple times cautioned your enthusiasm for making AE reports. If you think this is a 1RR violation then go ahead report it, and face the potential for a boomerang that I think is long overdue. nableezy - 17:27, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Please, keep it civil. There is no need for personal attacks such as accusing me of "admin shopping" (and don't you think if I was admin shopping, I would go for one who hasn't recently warned me and page blocked me?)

Believe it or not, I'm not eager to take editors to AE, so I will wait to see what SFR says about whether this is a revert. BilledMammal (talk) 17:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Pinging, or otherwise approaching, a specific admin for a problem is the definition of admin shopping. That isnt an accusation, thats just a fact. nableezy - 17:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

My understanding was that it is appropriate to ask an administrator to informally take a look at an issue, as an attempt at a low-drama resolution.

Are you saying otherwise, and that the only recourse is to go straight to ANI or AE when discussion between the involved editors fails to resolve a perceived conduct issue? BilledMammal (talk) 17:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

So, how about an interaction ban, with the exception that you can respond to RFCs started by one another granted you don't mention each other? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I have done nothing to merit a ban in any way whatsoever here, and if you impose one I will appeal it all the way to ArbCom if need be. Thats, pardon my French, bullshit. nableezy - 17:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) I have no issue with a two-way, voluntary unlogged IBAN; it will probably be helpful to reduce tension and drama. However, I would ask that it expires at the conclusion of the current war, and that the exception should extend to other formal discussions such as requested moves.

For the record and my future understanding, would you be able to clarify whether 16:58, 11 June 2024 is a revert? BilledMammal (talk) 17:53, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I refuse any voluntary ban here, and if it is imposed I will appeal it. BM coming here with bogus claims doesnt mean I should be banned from reverting edits they make or responding to claims they make on the talk pages they are active, which Id hazard to guess is nearly all of them. nableezy - 17:55, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

The entire dynamic between the two of you is disruptive. You'll argue with each other to no end other than the argument itself because you'll never convince each other of anything. This is the same reason I ibanned Lev and VM, and it certainly seemed Arbcom understood my intent. I imagine the same would happen here.

You don't have to respond to their claims on talk pages, there's plenty of other people who can, and it's not actually helping anything. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Wrong on all counts. I have not been uncivil or aggressive with BM on talk pages, and my responses to them have been cited by others. In many cases they make statements that I respond to demonstrating their position is incorrect and others agree with me. There is zero evidence for The entire dynamic between the two of you is disruptive, thats just an unsupported supposition based on what I assume are vibes. Again, if you impose an unjustified ban having been adminshopped here then I will appeal it. Do what you want, but its bullshit based on bullshit, and as Ive demonstrated any number of times I have no issue raising poorly justified bans. I dont need to convince BM of anything when I respond to them, the point is to convince a consensus of other editors that their position is not based in fact or policy, and on several occasions I have done just that. And I would hazard to guess the reason why one of us is on board with your proposal is because they see it as being to their advantage that I am unable to do that. nableezy - 18:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

If you dont want to be accused of admin shopping then yes, going to a venue where you are not picking the admin to respond would be what you should do. If you are just asking for advice then sure, but here you are asking an admin who has already given me a topic ban recently to opine on if I should be sanctioned. That is not asking somebody to informally look into an issue, and indeed you brought him here with threats of another unjustified ban. Color me surprised. nableezy - 17:52, 11 June 2024 (UTC)