(no subject) - WikiEN-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

(no subject)

Test

Re: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

VV

1 Sep 2004 1 Sep '04

9:52 p.m.

Someone please unblock me. �var Arnfj�r� Bjarmason has gone off his rocker. VeryVerily _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com

Reply

Show replies by date

blankfaze

1 Sep 1 Sep

9:55 p.m.

Nah, VV, you could use the time off. Maybe when your block expires you'll stop engaging in edit warfare and POV-pushing. ! blankfaze

Reply

Fred Bauder

10:11 p.m.

You seem to have reverted Henry Kissenger 4 times. Fred

From: "VV" <veryverily(a)myway.com> Reply-To: veryverily(a)myway.com, English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 17:52:02 -0400 (EDT) To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject) Someone please unblock me. ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason has gone off his rocker. VeryVerily _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Kate

10:30 p.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block (was: (no subject))

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 23:11, Fred Bauder wrote:

You seem to have reverted Henry Kissenger 4 times.

Is this an accepted policy? Was VV given suitable warning before the block? Kate.

Reply

Timwi

10:36 p.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block

Kate wrote:

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 23:11, Fred Bauder wrote:

You seem to have reverted Henry Kissenger 4 times.

Is this an accepted policy?

Yes, [[WP:3RR]].

Was VV given suitable warning before the block?

All I can see on VeryVerily's talk page is a rude remark from Ævar, and it's only 3 minutes older than the block. Timwi

Reply

Kate

10:51 p.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 23:36, Timwi wrote:

Kate wrote:

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 23:11, Fred Bauder wrote:

You seem to have reverted Henry Kissenger 4 times.

Is this an accepted policy?

Yes, [[WP:3RR]].

"In the case of edit wars on important pages, users are sometimes blocked." Is this an important page that required a block? Is it appropriate to block under that "policy" with (apparently) no warning? I cannot see it that way myself.

Was VV given suitable warning before the block?

All I can see on VeryVerily's talk page is a rude remark from Ævar, and it's only 3 minutes older than the block.

Yes, I saw that - I assumed it was set after the block as there was no suggestion that VV would be blocked if hir behaviour continued. Kate.

Reply

Pete/Pcb21

10:58 p.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block

Kate wrote:

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 23:36, Timwi wrote:

Yes, [[WP:3RR]].

"In the case of edit wars on important pages, users are sometimes blocked." Is this an important page that required a block? Is it appropriate to block under that "policy" with (apparently) no warning? I cannot see it that way myself.

There was also a degree of provocation from VV's edit war partner, node_ue, who commented "rv vandal" in his summary. The dispute was clearly a content dispute as the talk page proves, to label it vandalism was tantamount to incitement. I would've protected rather than blocked. Pete/Pcb21

Reply

Fred Bauder

11:57 p.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block (was: (no subject))

Obviously I think it is accepted policy. The only question to my mind, is can any sysop block him. As to a warning, he's an old hand. Fred

From: Kate <wikipedia(a)postoffice.intern.lythe.org.uk> Reply-To: wikipedia-reply(a)postoffice.intern.lythe.org.uk, English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 23:30:24 +0100 To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VeryVerily's block (was: (no subject)) On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 23:11, Fred Bauder wrote:

You seem to have reverted Henry Kissenger 4 times.

Is this an accepted policy? Was VV given suitable warning before the block? Kate. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Kate

2 Sep 2 Sep

12:12 a.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block (was: (no subject))

On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 00:57, Fred Bauder wrote:

Obviously I think it is accepted policy. The only question to my mind, is can any sysop block him. As to a warning, he's an old hand.

Continual problem users should be referred to arbitration, not unilaterally blocked. I think the fact that sie was immediately unblocked shows that it should not have been done in the first place without (at the very least) discussion. Kate.

Reply

Fred Bauder

12:25 a.m.

New subject: VeryVerily's block (was: (no subject))

Yes, guess I'm wrong. Fred

From: Kate <wikipedia(a)postoffice.intern.lythe.org.uk> Reply-To: wikipedia-reply(a)postoffice.intern.lythe.org.uk, English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 01:12:25 +0100 To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VeryVerily's block (was: (no subject)) On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 00:57, Fred Bauder wrote:

Obviously I think it is accepted policy. The only question to my mind, is can any sysop block him. As to a warning, he's an old hand.

Continual problem users should be referred to arbitration, not unilaterally blocked. I think the fact that sie was immediately unblocked shows that it should not have been done in the first place without (at the very least) discussion. Kate. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

7200

days inactive

7201

days old

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

9 comments

6 participants

tags (0)

participants (6)

blankfaze
Fred Bauder
Kate
Pete/Pcb21
Timwi
VV