Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SashiRolls (talk | contribs) at 23:29, 18 August 2019 (++ collegiality). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

For those who like to rummage, the been is here.

IBAN modified

Hi SashiRolls. The two way IBAN you were under with Tryptofish has been modified. It is now a one-way IBAN where you are now banned from interacting with him subject to the terms of WP:IBAN. I've logged this at the AE log . TonyBallioni (talk) 21:55, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll add that to the story. Also, enormous thanks to User:Levivich for taking the time to dig up all the evidence in article space, which was no small investment in time. The story will also contain details about talk space. I do not anticipate contributing to the project further as a result of the continuing dishonesty. 🌿 SashiRolls 07:18, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

TonyBallioni, it would have been decent to ask SashiRolls for a statement before closing that. Due to the block SashiRolls was unable to respond, which isn't the right way to handle things. Trypt's behavior at the ANI thread and reopening of the closed thread to keep going after Sashi were not ideal and showed me that the 2 way ban was necessary. Mr Ernie (talk) 07:49, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

SashiRolls I want to offer strong support for taking this to ArbCom. The lower courts are clearly incapacitated, given their lack of response to evidence provided by (you and) Levivich. The apparent favoritism is not what one expects to see after issuing threats like this, but perhaps there is a chilling effect? (I also wonder whether lower courts are more prone to the "good ole boy" effect, where years and years of prolific activity at Admin noticeboards make certain editors so familiar it becomes impossible to find fault.) I believe ArbCom can rise above all of this to some degree. Hounding is not something that should be rewarded or ignored. I hope you will consider filing again now that you've no options elsewhere. petrarchan47คุก 18:49, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Snoog lodges a complaint about neutral POV editing

You are edit-warring on an article covered by discretionary sanctions. You should self-revert immediately. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

No. You are being disruptive, again. Quit harassing me. 🌿 SashiRolls 16:43, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Criticism of Misplaced Pages

Why are you adding dates to the section headings when it's quite obvious that such dates are irrelevant? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Seriously need a proper reply soon please. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

I've also asked at Talk:Criticism of Misplaced Pages#Dates in section titles. I do not understand these edits. – bradv🍁 17:32, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for observing the entry was busy for editing (CF. Template:Busy). You are welcome to revert now that the data analysis has been done, and a stable version with the completed dates is available. Noting the date ranges for the criticism in each section does not seem to me irrelevant, in fact it seems helpful. However, if everyone is against it feel free to revert the work now that it can be linked to. Best, 🌿 SashiRolls 17:59, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

Your recent editing history at Criticism of Misplaced Pages shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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. Bbb23 (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Noticeboard discussion

There's a discussion about you on the Administrators' noticeboard. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:39, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes I received an umpteenth notification. As I said before, please stop harassing me.🌿 SashiRolls 10:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

This is not harassment, it is a required notification. ~Awilley (talk) 13:25, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I have been pinged by Snoog at the Village Pump, the Help Desk, AN, twice on my talk page in the last few days. Their continual references to me as "feverish", "troublesome", time-wasting, etc. on talk pages over the years are standard smear for you I suppose, AWilley? Do you really think I don't know this is a required notification? 🌿 SashiRolls 14:08, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

You can make it so that you don't see the pings. It is in the notifications section of your preferences. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Self-Templarization

I am aware that DS exist on English Misplaced Pages, specifically as regards BLP, American politics, and genetically modified organisms. I am also aware that DS does not mean devoir surveillé as it does in French. This is not a test. 🌿 SashiRolls 15:25, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Violation of 3RR at Jill Stein

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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.

You should self-revert immediately. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

"Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert." You have done no work here: you have made no propositions for correcting the errors on the page, and have reverted my various improvements 3 times. As it stands, the article now at least contains a source for the claims you wish to make, which it did not for the past two weeks due to your sloppy revert on July 23rd. Your insistence on the charged, clickbait term "legal defense" when the article talks about "compliance" with a Senate inquiry is just one example among many.🌿 SashiRolls 12:22, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 12:59, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Interesting Situation.

I hope my comments aren't coming off as aimed at you, they are not. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Response to questions asked about Haiti

Unless I'm misreading something, your recent comments in this thread look like pretty clear cut cases of casting WP:ASPERSIONS on other editors. If you're going to accuse other editors of misbehaving (whether by implication or explicitly) then you should ping them and you should be ready to provide substantive evidence to back up your claims. If you don't have evidence, then you should stop saying it.

I really don't want to spend time at WP:ANI, but this seems very over the line to me, and I will ask for input there if this continues. Nblund 16:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Could you indicate what you think is an aspersion? I'm providing the references you yourself requested to the debates over the Clinton Foundation / Haiti 3 years ago ("Did I miss some evidence somewhere?") I don't know. Did you read the discussion about the Clinton Foundation role in Haiti that Helen & TFD are talking about? I provided links to the page Clinton Foundation, Haiti-United States relations, Caracol, Nord-Est, & Association of Industries of Haiti in the diff you cite and mentioned nobody other than Helen (not a wikipedian) SavvyJack and TFD, all of whom I do believe agree that there was a problem... I said nothing negative about anyone. I answered your question, and did not bring up this line of inquiry. Why are you threatening me, Nblund? 🌿 SashiRolls

This statement: Now some people edit over 15 hour stretches, day after day, sometimes taking 2 or 3 hours of breaks in the day, sometimes not, for months on end. I often think it "must be nice" not to have to do a day job, but I've also understood that it may also be tough not having a day job to do and feeling obliged to edit Misplaced Pages instead., along with the statement I linked to, both look to be implying that editors are being paid to insert biased edits on to Misplaced Pages. I don't really see any other way to plausibly read them. I don't see anything in those links that supports the claims of paid editing. If you have it, you should present it. If you don't, you should drop it. Nblund 17:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

it may also be tough not having a day job implies being unemployed, not being paid to edit. Again, I encourage you to get back to work on your dissertation, since that is what will qualify you to continue along your chosen path. Fighting wiki-battles will not.🌿 SashiRolls 17:53, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I asked for evidence of paid editing, and you said that your response was addressing that request - so then what were you implying if you weren't talking about accusing someone of paid editing? If you're not trying to imply that Snoogans is a paid editor, then perhaps you should clarify that on BLPN as well. I'm sure I'm not the only one reading things that way. Nblund 18:01, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Whether Snoog is a paid editor or not is not a question that can be addressed given the rules protecting anonymous actors on English Misplaced Pages. The raw facts about the 15-hour days (e.g. 7-8 Aug, 6-7 Aug) are there for anybody who wants to look at them. This could be for many reasons... they could be retired, unemployed, an ABD student not writing their dissertation, independently wealthy, on disability leave, with a job not requiring diligence, etc...) Speculating as to why they edit 40+ hours per week is beyond what we're allowed to do (especially if one suggests "paid editing" as you have above). 🌿 SashiRolls 18:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I really don't buy that. I think you understand the issue, and I am asking you, for the sake of my dissertation, to spare me to trouble of going to ANI over complaints you have no ability to prove and that do nothing to improve article content or the editing environment. If you're sincerely confused, feel free to ping me. Unwatching. Nblund

The "15 hours" is obviously a reference to myself, as can be seen in this off-wiki discussion that Sashi was part of. For what its worth, if you google "snoox", "snoog" and "snooganssnoogans", you'll find dozens of references over multiple years where SashiRolls is complaining about me on forums for disgruntled Misplaced Pages editors, with all kinds of vague rambling allusions to me being a paid editor. This includes discussions where Sashi and others are trying to work out my real life identity (which I don't want to link to publicly, so as to not encourage others to try to doxx me). Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't care what your real life identity is, Snoog. I care that you misrepresent sources. 🌿 SashiRolls 18:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Block

I'm blocking you for another week due to an accumulation of uncollaborative behavior. This includes the edit warring reported here, more SnooX despite being repeatedly warned and sanctioned over that, vague threats about being written up (off-wiki?), and harassment in the form of continued jabs at Snoogans. The next block will be longer. ~Awilley (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Hullo, willey. I take it you did not find my preparing the evidence as Lev suggested we do collaborative? I take it you did not find my so-fix-it attitude towards another of Snoog's biased contribution to be collaborative either? Odd, since it was pointed out publicly how bad the edit was. I take it this is what you want to prevent... that an ArbCom case be filed against Snoog?

Observing the number of hours someone edits is against the rules? Referring to people by their pseudonyms too? And concerning googling "snoox" I think you'll find that it doesn't lead anyone to me talking about en.wp ... (just another Pinocchio for your collection, eh?)

Not to worry, you'll teach Snoog right from wrong, won't you Mr. Willey? That's all that's needed... a clever fellow like you to patiently explain to them what they're doing wrong? It makes for good theatre, while everybody's looking, that's for sure, Mr. Willey.

I am not jabbing at Snoog. I quietly prepared evidence for an ArbCom case against them, as suggested in the thread at BLP/N. I responded to the questions as to why people were concerned about the Clinton Foundation page, without saying anything mean about anybody. I responded to Snoog when he accused me above of things I've never done. (As you know I have repeatedly asked you to sanction them for claiming I've asked anyone to doxx them. I certainly never have. That is a lie. But, you seem to be happy with letting it go... over & over. By the way, I have asked Snoog to stop commenting here, but they don't listen, do they? ^^

So you've moved cross-country, huh? like your new place, your new job? 🌿 SashiRolls 23:04, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Awilley, unfortunately at this point your seemingly complete cluelessness administrating this topic area needs to be called out. Suggesting one editor take a week off but blocking another? What are you doing? This is administrative harassment and I would like to ask you to leave Sashi alone. Mr Ernie (talk) 23:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I take administrative action when it becomes apparent that talk alone isn't enough to get someone to abandon a bad behavior. ~Awilley (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Lol if you say so. That was funny. Mr Ernie (talk) 00:37, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

May I please have a diff showing SashiRolls asking Snooganssnoogans to stop posting to his talk page followed by a diff or diffs of Snooganssnoogans doing it again? (As usual, certain things such as ANI notices are required to be posted to a user's talk page and do not count). I will also be checking to see if SashiRolls stopped posting to Snooganssnoogans talk page when the request was made. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:52, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

You could just ask me Guy, you're on my talkpage. I think it was back on February 21, though perhaps it wasn't as crystal clear as I have learned to make it since. Since then I've posted to their page once concerning a copyvio, which I ended up bringing to AN/I (so, notification) and which turned into vaudeville with all sorts of people adding illustrations... then once the 29 July after they'd edited my TP a couple times a few days earlier. The diffs in that edit are in the ArbCom case which I guess I'll have to help file if that is the only thing that will stop the bad behavior. 🌿 SashiRolls 01:25, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Keeping to my standard practice of not passing judgement on who is wrong and who is right before I see the evidence, the evidence above is insufficient to show that Snooganssnoogans posted on your talk talk page after being asked not to. Not saying it did or did not happen, just that you haven't posted diffs showing it. If you file a case at arbcom, be aware that arbcom requires evidence in the form of diffs that show the behavior that you claim happened. For example, at User:SashiRolls/alt-litterbox#Case prep you make a claim of edit warring with one diff. You need a diff showing each revert and a diff showing that the user has been warned. Also, that page keeps talking about things like "the source says" and "the source does not talk about". That isn't going to cut the mustard at arbcom. You need something like "user A claimed(diff) that source B(cite) says (exact quote from user A), but the source says (exact quote from source). When this was pointed out to him (diff) he responded with X(diff)." Every claim in an arbcom case needs a link to a source or a diff that shows that the claim is accurate.

I would also caution you against the snarky comments you made above. If you continue that sort of behavior you may end up with a lengthy block and no talk page access. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your input Guy. Talk to you in a week. (i.e. not before, please have the kindness to refrain from commenting here for the next week. Is that clear enough?) 🌿 SashiRolls 02:24, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Guy Macon, to be fair to Sashi he once caught a lengthy block for pointing out fishy behavior by a former admin socking to circumvent an editing restriction, which is something editors like Snoog still like to use against him (see that recent ANEW post where that was described a bit more obtusely). Nothing surprises me anymore. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:26, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

While the AE filer was a sock, the diffs did point to problematic behavior. There were various other instances of warnings, reports and blocks for similar behavior (accusing other editors and Misplaced Pages when failing to reach consensus, hounding some editors, fomenting conspiracy theories). This was even ongoing during a related unblock discussion (although various editors expressed compassion and hope there as the indefinite block had been standing a while, resulting in editing privileges being restored). —PaleoNeonate – 14:33, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Note that as always with this krew, not a single diff of me doing anything wrong is provided, just vague references to me doing something vaguely wrong while pointing out a massive astroturfing operation corresponding very closely to DNC/intelligence objectives... being led by Cirt under cover of a new account (since the last had had similar problems). Not one single diff. ^^ 🌿 SashiRolls 15:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Anybody wanting to revert some vandalism, might want to have a look here. The IP first vandalized the Clinton Foundation entry (on my watchlist) and was immediately reverted. However nobody bothered to look at their contribs. Fixed here. NB: if this vandalism was related to my block, I would ask that people don't do that, but instead write articles for mainstream publications. @Awilley:, this would have been removed already earlier, but you blocked me for preparing evidence for an ArbCom case against (among others) SS and yourself. So I'll let you know about that vandalism so you can fix it yourself. 🌿 SashiRolls 11:19, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Response to block

Before this block expires, I would like to make a few things clear. This block was made by an involved administrator who I had asked to steer clear of me, but who is constantly being badgered by two people to block me (Snoogans & Kolya Butternut, both of whom have been involved in drama not involving me in the last week () ()). I intend to quietly correct the blpvio introduced in the former diff (Kathy Shelton's issue was with HRC not Bill) and do absolutely nothing about the latter wall of text, as it does not concern me.

In the interest of not escalating matters, Awilley, I have not sought to have this block overturned, nor have I sought to have you desysopped. Just above, I highlighted the repeated aspersions which your friend continues to repeat against me since September 2018 (that I have sought to have them doxxed) and which I made you aware of at that time. Their repetition of this false claim immediately preceding your block is one of the primary sources of bad blood between us (you have not encouraged them to desist from casting aspersions); the other is the misrepresentations I was quietly documenting when you blocked me (and which I suspect was a large part of the reason you blocked me, to chill the ArbCom case people were suggesting compiling diffs for at BLP/N).

In your block, Awilley, you said "the next block will be longer". There are two problems with this statement: first, it assumes there will be a next block... which is an entirely negative (and threatening) way of envisioning the future. Second it assumes that you will be doing the blocking despite your involvement, which given the comments from MrErnie & Dodger67 concerning this block, strikes me as tone-deaf.

Could you indicate on your own TP, Awilley, whether you agree to steer clear of me going forward, or if you rather intend to continue for your primary contributions to en.wp to be policing a careful reader and productive contributor? I see that people are complaining (here, on your talk page, and at BLP/N) about the uneven "justice" you've been meting out of late. I hope you will listen to these legitimate concerns.

(NB: your 238 edits to mainspace in the last 3.5 years are roughly equivalent to the number I've made in the last 90 days despite your blocking me twice and chilling my enthusiasm for participating.)

Finally, wrt the content issue that you said you blocked me for (correcting misleading prose on Jill Stein's BLP) I think you should note that your friend has not reverted my correction of their prose. Knowing them pretty well, this is likely a sign that they understand the current text is more accurate than what they had written. The path of least drama is letting it go, Awilley, as you seem to have trouble seeing the matter clearly. I hope you'll take this constructive criticism with humility and will not lash out at me further. For my part I will avoid using the word you've forbidden me to use (no, it's nothing as dramatic as the language used in a recent request for re-adminship, but is just a playful portmanteau), and I will be especially attentive should further traps be hastily set to make it look like I've violated any rules while correcting misrepresentations, such as the blpvio linked to above. (If anyone is watching this and wishes to correct the blpvio mentioned above so I don't even have to bother -- as was done with the vandalism I reported earlier this week -- they should feel free to go ahead and do so.)

The following people should understand that I would prefer that they steer clear of my TP except for required notifications until further notice:  Snooganssnoogans, Kolya Butternut, MrX, Awilley, & Guy Macon. Thank you.   will extend you the same courtesy unless I am being discussed on yours (with notification or without -- as was the case on Awilley's TP recently). 🌿   SashiRolls 15:50, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Short response: Re "the next block will be longer": Until you begin to treat your colleagues here on Misplaced Pages like...well...colleagues, you will likely be subjected to a series of blocks escalating in length, whether those blocks are imposed by myself or another admin. Re "administrative harassment" first see WP:HA#NOT, second, I'm fairly confident that my early intervention at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive252#SashiRolls saved SashiRolls from a stiffer sanction, probably a topic ban. I prefer to see users abandon poor behaviors and continue constructive editing than just see them get banned at AE, and that has been the primary motivation for my "involvement" here. ~Awilley (talk) 22:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

May the volcano grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change (people posting to my talk page when I ask them not to), the courage to change the things I can (my approach to the ambient toxicity), and the wisdom to know the difference. So, colleague, do you really intend to do something about poor behaviour or am I being unwise to point at the elephant in AP2? You may respond to this question here, if you wish. 🌿 SashiRolls 23:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Alohapedia

Add reference for Andrews' definition of aloha:  Done (It felt good to be thanked within half an hour of being back, thanks! I passed that thanks along to someone else, too... ^_^)

References

1. Andrews, Lorrin; Parker, Henry (1922). A Dictionary of the Hawaiian Language. Honolulu: Board of Commissioners of Public Archives of the Territory of Hawaii. p. 52.

Further to-dos:

• Perhaps add illm to Vincent Duclert at fr.wp, mentioned in recent edit-war.  Done Also clean up punctuation errors and grammatical infelicities and check on refs that have been deleted at YVM.

• Add Postol's paper to the RS/N "general" survey of reliability of Bellingcat started the very same day Bellingcat released an article called "Tulsi Gabbard’s Reports on Chemical Attacks in Syria – A Self-Contradictory Error Filled Mess". Why wouldn't Mr. Higgins have linked to this paper published on 6 June 2019 at accuracy.org? That's an absolutely remarkable omission given the subject...  Done
• deal with unpleasant preparation for an ArbCom case (grrrrr, if only it weren't necessary...)

Re

- Well, I believe that "Holocaust in Poland" was also a huge and meaningless waste of time. I think the person who started this case (Icewhiz) did a big disservice to the project, whatever the outcome. He had to either be able to go along with other contributors or edit something else. Same applies to other contributors and to the AP subject area. My very best wishes (talk) 22:01, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Your edit summary made me laugh. (same things apply to EE as to AP.) Indeed, it does appear there is a lot of off-wiki coordination going on in AP these days. New gamergate-savvy users magically pop up to thwart efforts to achieve NPOV. That said, I agree the name-calling from both sides in that VM v. IW case was way over-the-top and I would assume that both sides will be sanctioned as a result.

It's not clear why you are responding here rather than where the question was asked. Any further discussion should take place where the question was asked and not here. I hope that this is clear. 🌿 SashiRolls 22:34, 18 August 2019 (UTC)