Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:31, 27 July 2010

"I wiki, therefore I exist."--Wittsun (talk) 05:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Your arbitration request

I have closed and archived your recently opened arbitration request. Current arbitration policy requires that four or more active arbitrators support opening a case than those that oppose opening it. As five arbitrators had already voted to decline your request, with eleven active arbitrators your request became mathematically impossible to be accepted.

While the Arbitration Committee is essentially the last court of appeal (Jimbo Wales, who has the power to overturn them, has never done so), that does not mean your topic ban will last forever, or even six months. If you show evidence of doing good work in areas unrelated to your topic ban for the next three months, there is a chance that an appeal to WP:AN would be successful.

Please feel free to contact me on my talk page if you have any questions,
NW (Talk) 15:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

ANI discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 13:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Per the above discussion, it is clear that the topic ban as worded was unclear, especially in regard to Misplaced Pages namespace pages, and is therefore amended as follows. "You are banned from making any edit broadly related to race, ethnicity or religion; this includes all pages and talkpages in all namespaces. This ban runs for a period of 6 months (i.e. until 13 January 2011)." Since the original wording was unclear, no action will be taken as regards to your recent edit on WP:AN. Black Kite (t) (c) 14:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

• As absurd and bigoted as this ban is, where did the ban on 'religion' come from? Is that a code word for anything related to jews.. including christianity? What about Buddism? Voodoo? No? Why? How did the 'community' of gerrymandering, bad-faith panders decide that one? Also what are the rules regarding the interpretation of so-called consensus relating to 'topic banning' and 'page banning'? The topic ban has turned out to be much wider than my contributions hitherto. How is that possible? --Wittsun (talk) 20:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

  The above is probably a violation of the self-same topic ban. If you have an issue with it, you can appeal it at WP:AN or through the Arbitrartion Committee. See Misplaced Pages:Banning policy. –xeno 20:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? What are you referring to when you write 'the above is probably a violation of the self-same topic ban'?--Wittsun (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It is an edit related to race, ethnicity, or religion. –xeno 21:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

What edit?--Wittsun (talk) 21:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

–xeno 21:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm asking for reasons, on my own userpage, regarding the nature of my topic ban and its arbitrary impromptu expansion. Don't you have something else you could be doing than buzzing around here?--Wittsun (talk) 21:25, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I suppose I could've blocked you instead? –xeno 21:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

The reason why your topic ban included religion was because of this edit: , which was an attack on Christians. Stonemason89 (talk) 21:27, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Only in the feverish mind of a wingnut, could that edit be misconstrued to be an 'attack on christians'. So that single edit on a talk page got me topic banned for six months. Outrageous.--Wittsun (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Now you're name-calling, too? "Feverish mind of a wingnut" isn't exactly CIVIL. Stonemason89 (talk) 21:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

If you knew them meaning of civility you wouldn't be WP:STALKing my userpage. You, sirrah, and your coterie of barn flies, are an embarrassment to common knowledge.--Wittsun (talk) 21:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)