User talk:Zaathras

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talk page

Start. Zaathras (talk) 01:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles related to American Politics

Commons-emblem-notice.svg

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. If you have questions, please contact me.

ST47 (talk) 01:34, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. Zaathras (talk) 02:52, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Important Notice

Commons-emblem-notice.svg

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in climate change. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 16:59, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thumbs up icon Zaathras (talk) 13:35, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Racial Views of Donald Trump

Hi, saw you reverted some of my edits to the Racial Views of Donald Trump page with the comment "Whitewashing". I've raised it on the talk page, perhaps you could explain what you meant. As far as I can tell the only whitewashing is the attempt to eliminate anything that contradicts the page's narrative. Rambo Apocalypse (talk) 15:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Stop icon This is your only warning; if you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments again, as you did at Talk:Joe Biden, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Rusf10 (talk) 22:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

First off, you have no authoritative backing to issue warnings, so we can laugh that one off. Second, "legitimate talk page comments" is not accurate. You templated a user, you didn't comment. Removing your wrongly-applied template is not changing your talk page comments, as it wasn't actually a comment. Zaathras (talk) 01:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
You obviously don't take any of this seriously. There are very few instances where it is acceptable to revert someone on a talk page. Second, what authority do you have to lecture me on SPA accounts, which is not the same thing as a sockpuppet. You yourself are a borderline SPA. I've never heard anyone use the phrase "Go outside and jerk yourself a soda", but I don't like the way it sounds, read WP:CIVILITY. Please don't continue down this road because it will eventually lead to a block or ban.--Rusf10 (talk) 04:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
It'll lead to a block or ban for you buddy bro, if you keep using templates incorrectly. I will see to it that you stop harassing that user. As for the quote, it is from Bugsy. Zaathras (talk) 12:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. - Alexis Jazz 18:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I have responded to the best of my ability, and have nothing further to add. Zaathras (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

Commons-emblem-hand.svg

The following sanction now applies to you:

You have been topic banned from all pages and discussions concerning post-1932 American politics for six months. Please read WP:TBAN to see what "topic banned" means.

You have been sanctioned for the WP:CIVIL violations and battle-ground behavior reported at ANI permalink.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Johnuniq (talk) 05:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Johnuniq (talk) 05:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

6 months seems a bit hefty for infraction #1, but whatevs.
A shame this didn't get rolling a few days earlier, 11/28/20 is 2 days past Thanksgiving. Zaathras (talk) 18:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
You're right, it is hefty. The diffs showed a very inappropriate approach. An appeal after three months of collaborative editing in other areas might be successful. Johnuniq (talk) 01:29, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
+1. Zaathras (talk) 02:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
If it's important to you, then I think you should appeal right now.  What puzzles me is why anyone thinks you should have to put up with Rusf10 (or any editor) going to your personal talk page to threaten you & to forcefully attack you personally. Now grant it, I've only been here a very short 35 days so I'm learning the rules, but from what little I know of the WP guidelines, it seems to me that Rusf10 was "bludgeoning" by starting a 'survey' that had already been closed just days before (because he/she did not like the results of the other survey) & then he/she started an edit war with SPECIFICO & you by inappropriately tagging me an SPA.  And instead of ending his/her edit war, Rusf10 personally attacked you & SPECIFICO on the article's talk page & then he/she went to your personal talk page to threaten you, to silence you.
I'm not 2nd guessing the Admin, who know far more than I do about the WP rules, but as far as a "topic ban" goes, out of the 8 diffs Rusf10 is complaining about, only 2 of the 8 were on a political talk page, 3 of the 8 were on non-political talk pages that had zero (0) to do with politics, and the last 3 of the 8 were you defending yourself on your personal talk page against Rusf10's threats & personal attacks against you.  I don't know, like I said, the Admin knows for more than me, but, if it's important to you, then I think you should appeal right now. And by the way, I've seen far worse said on WP talk pages than what you wrote and, in those cases, no one got topic banned.
Finally, I would like to say "thank you" for defending me against Rusf10's unfounded and inappropriate tagging of me. As one long-time editor wrote on within Rusf10's survey: "I absolutely agree. BetsyRMadison's account does not have the typical characteristics associated with an SPA. I see no evidence whatsoever that this editor exhibits ... Therefore, tagging BetsyRMadison's account as an SPA is inappropriate. In fact, I would argue that in this case the act is designed to unduly influence a potential closer of this discussion, which is WORSE than being a niche editor."
So, once again, thank you, I truly appreciate you sticking your neck out to defend me. WP needs editors like you. BetsyRMadison (talk) 12:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
I appreciate it, but around here is really is like the old schoolyard days where if the bully punches you and you punch back, the teacher only tends to see punch #2. The Three-fold Law will lead to some of the names at that discussion being dragged there themselves someday, I have no doubt. Zaathras (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
This user is banned form this talk page. Zaathras (talk) 13:34, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
@BetsyRMadison: I made the report, not Rusf10. Zaathras should have discussed the SPA thing on Rusf10's talk page, and if that didn't work out, report the issue elsewhere. But that wasn't even what I created the report for. Zaathras was not working with other editors but on several occasions against them. That doesn't help the project, so I reported it. - Alexis Jazz 11:19, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
To Alexis Jazz - You say you "created a report" because in your mind, he/she was "was not working with other editors but on several occasions against them." Yet, in your filed report you did not mention any such thing.  So would you be so kind as to address them here? 
  1. Can you give specific examples of projects is Z working on that you feel he/she is not working with editors but against them?
  2. Does the "Topic Ban" include topics that cover topics/projects Z is working on that you feel Z works against editors?
  3. Do you feel that it would have been better for you to resolve your real concerns if you would have listed the projects and explained in detail your real concerns within the complaint you filed so that Admin Johnuniq could have helped you solve your real concerns?
Alexis, I know that both you & Z volunteer your time and work hard to improve WP articles. So I feel you both deserve to have your real concerns be discussed and resolved. None of us are perfect, we all make mistakes, and when we do, it's best to be honest with ourselves and each other so we can resolve issues and work together. In my view, it will be impossible for you to get your real concerns resolved if Z does not know what your real concerns are. So I hope you will take time address them here. Thanks BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:07, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: any post by you on this page again will be reverted. Zaathras (talk) 13:34, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Zaathras, Sorry, I didn't see your comment until after I replied to Alexis. I am only trying to figure out why Alexis didn't address his/her real concerns with the Admin. I'm scratchin' my head on that. BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:49, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
That's fine, but I can't make comments specifically about the case anymore as that'd likely be construed as being part of the topic ban. Some love to nitpick around here. There's plenty of other topics to dive around in, anime, scifi...a lot of the old Transformers articles look like they could use some sprucing up. It's all good. :) Zaathras (talk) 13:54, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
"anime" now you're talkin'! There sure are a lot of fantastic anime's out there. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Confused

I'm not sure what happened here; your edit summary says this section is exclusively about white supremacy, but your edit replaced "white supremacy" with "racism". M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 00:43, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, that was a serious dyslexic moment on my part, I swear it was the exact opposite earlier. Thanks. Zaathras (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Notification

Commons-emblem-notice.svg

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Thumbs up icon Zaathras (talk) 22:09, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Arb remedy at Donald Trump

Hey Zaathras, Bob K31416 makes a good point about your recent edit at Donald Trump. There's an active 24-hour BRD cycle remedy on the page. Though it appears you waited 24 hours before reverting, you didn't discuss before doing so. I recommend a self-reversion here. I hope this helps. Firefangledfeathers 04:34, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, already reverted. Firefangledfeathers 05:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Yea, people are bound & determined to die on this hill for The Former Guy, with regards to this topic. So be it. Zaathras (talk) 22:06, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Your edit warring

Discussion is closed. Zaathras (talk) 17:35, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

A few tips/polite requests:

1) Please refrain from adding your personal speculation into the Murder of Tessa Majors article about the subject's gender identity.

2) When it comes to MOS:GENDERID, follow the sources. If the sources are inconclusive, don't fill in the blanks with your unfounded but I'm sure well-intentioned inferences.

3) Please not blindly revert a host of changes because you took issue with one specific aspect of a change.

4) Please do not claim consensus for content that was not actually ever in the article.

Thanks. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Mr. Wikieditor19920, remind me again of how many Wikipedia topics from which you are topic-banned from for edit-warring and general hostility? Is it 1, 2? Zaathras (talk) 17:05, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Don't give me this garbage. You are removing content that doesn't even reference pronouns. You are wholesale reverting additions to the lead (and leaving the rest of the article using she/her pronouns untouched) out of blind antagonism. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
You also keep claiming the "Burden" is on me. For what, exactly? No part of the article uses they/them pronouns. Your reversion here actually MAINTAINS she/her pronouns. So this is all bullshit. You aren't even actually contesting my changes in the manner you are claiming. If you want to go to ANI purely to bully someone away from the article, rethink your approach. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 17:19, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Also, take this as an advance warning that you are at 3RR. For three reverts that actually RESTORED she/her pronouns, contrary to your crap claims above. Of course, AE is a totally arbitrary roll of the dice, so be my guest if that's the route you want to go. But this is exactly the kind of toxic, antagonistic editing that makes Wikipedia largely an unproductive waste of time. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 17:29, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't know about you

But when an editor comes to my Talk page in the midst of a debate and without due cause posts a warning template there, I think a reasonable person could construe that as an effort to harass and intimidate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Soibangla&action=history

soibangla (talk) 15:39, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Pretty much, yes. There's an essay somewhere here about the "polite pov push", but I'm always terrible at remembering those WP:* names. Zaathras (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alerts

Commons-emblem-notice.svg

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Just giving you the heads up about the discretionary sanctions that apply to the Rowling article. I saw you already received the BLP noticed a few days ago. If you wish, you can use Template:DS/Aware at the top of your talk page to show awareness of any notifications you receive when you archive your talk page contents. Sideswipe9th (talk) 04:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

<div style="font-size: x-small;">The article is a derivative under the <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License</a>. A link to the original article can be found <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk%3AZaathras">here</a> and attribution parties <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zaathras&amp;action=history">here</a>. By using this site, you agree to the <a href="https://www.gpedia.com/terms-of-use.php">Terms of Use</a>. Gpedia Ⓡ is a registered trademark of the Cyberajah Pty Ltd.</div>