User talk:Adtonko
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
Acroterion (talk) 03:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- While I see the good Faith in this, i feel unsure where to put this. Anyways, Danke. -- Adtonko (talk) 07:14, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- You can just remove it once you've seen it, if you like. The alert issuance will have been stored in the system log for future reference; in theory you shouldn't get another alert for edits within the same topic area. Of course, you can also always use the Ctopics/aware template to indicate in advance which areas you're aware of, as well. Best, ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- And there in lies a fundamental problem. I have been issued a log entry, because I simply pointed out that an article, wich is looked down, is WP:NPOV (and still is). You applied an adminestrative action in an preemtive, intimidating move. Alone that it makes an log Entry at Filter 602 makes this not just a mere 'Alert'.
- I will not remove this entry however, as this would make you and your colleagues less accountable.
- Anyways, happy editing -- Adtonko (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- That is not actually a correct statement. You made an edit to a talk page which is covered by the contentious topics procedure. Per that procedure, you're supposed to be alerted (and since it is your first time receiving an alert in that topic area, the use of the above template is *mandatory*) *specifically* with an alert that will be captured under Edit Filter 602 (the reason for which, being that it allows an editor in the future to be able to check the SystemLog under filter 602 to identify if you've ever received a prior alert for that topic area; if so, there is a different template we are supposed to use.). That is not an "administrative action." Indeed, this can, and regularly is, be performed by non-admins. Further, the template explicitly notes that there is no implication that there is a problem with your editing. I'll caution you to assume good faith, and not cast aspersions about regular, standard notifications. Nobody is requiring you to edit in a contentious topic area, that is your choice alone. If you make that choice, you are subject to the increased scrutiny that comes with editing in such a topic area, and the requisite alerts and notifications thereof. If you find being notified about our policies that intimidating, you're always welcome to choose to edit less contentious areas of the project instead. Your call. In any event, best of luck. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 18:16, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- You just reworded what I said. Secondly, I do not have a problem with the notice itself. I find it actually usefull. I have a problem with the log entry. Anyways, as you want me to assume good faith (wich I already did in my very first reply to this) I do that. Thirdly, adminestrative does in no way mean 'done by an admin'. Adminestrative action is the simple way of 'keeping track' or 'to apply something to something' and log entries are, by the very nature of this, adminestrative. And, as i said, happy editing -- Adtonko (talk) 18:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- Contentious topics is a part of the English wikipedia. If you don't want to be given alerts recorded in the edit filter, I'm afraid your only real option is to refrain from editing the English wikipedia. In theory, you can try to edit only areas not part of some contentious topic, but in practice this would likely entail so much work on your part that it's IMO not worth it. It's sort of a moot point now since you've already chosen to edit the English wikipedia in an area covered by contentious topics. However the WP:RTV does exist, so you if you wish to, you could have your account renamed and leave here for ever. Note that because of global accounts, this would also affect your account on the German wikipedia, so you will need to deal with whatever goes on there. I do not know if their rules would allow it especially if you want to continue editing. It's possible they will provided you make a new account and clearly link your vanished account to the new account. Note that in that case, it would still be possible for editors to look into the German wikipedia to find out your new account name, however since you are not editing here, no one could mention any such details here. Nil Einne (talk) 11:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- P.S. I'm not an admin and have no desire to be one. I've given I think dozens of alerts (also counting the older discretionary sanctions ones). I've had various questions and complaints, however these have always been because of the alert it self. AFAIK, no one has ever complained about the edit filter entry for any alert I've given, nor for that matter when I've seen other complaints or queries from editors when others have given alerts. This makes sense since the vast majority of editors and especially new editors, know basically nothing about edit filters. It's used here for "administrative purposes" if you want to say that, but it's not something that most editors know or care about. Actually I'm fairly sure even plenty of editors who are familiar with edit filters do not realise it's being used here or why. In other words, if there is anything intimidating, it's nearly always the alert itself but arbcom have done their best to avoid that. I personally try to avoid giving alerts when it's someone I'm in dispute with to reduce any intimidatory effect, but it's not always possible. It's unfortunate that you find the edit filter so intimidating, but as I mentioned, in that case your only real choice it to stop editing here, except it's sort of too late. Nil Einne (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- You are late to the party. I'm not new to Wikipedia, i just have choosen to edit in the language i'm more familiar with. While the german wikipedia is, as all things german, a burecratic nightmare, it has far more (and i am very biased here) rules that make sense. My complaint about the filter entry is that you are being put on a watchlist. On first glance that is nothing notable. But on the same page thats how a very dark chapter of german history begun, which is a contentious topic in the german wikipedia. But why you would suggest me a RTV is beyond me. Just because I find it irritating that something is used in a way it shouldn't is nothing, that would lead to me renaming my account. If i decide to leave the project altogether, then I will just leave.
- In any case, thanks for your input on the matter, happy editing. -- Adtonko (talk) 14:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- P.S. I'm not an admin and have no desire to be one. I've given I think dozens of alerts (also counting the older discretionary sanctions ones). I've had various questions and complaints, however these have always been because of the alert it self. AFAIK, no one has ever complained about the edit filter entry for any alert I've given, nor for that matter when I've seen other complaints or queries from editors when others have given alerts. This makes sense since the vast majority of editors and especially new editors, know basically nothing about edit filters. It's used here for "administrative purposes" if you want to say that, but it's not something that most editors know or care about. Actually I'm fairly sure even plenty of editors who are familiar with edit filters do not realise it's being used here or why. In other words, if there is anything intimidating, it's nearly always the alert itself but arbcom have done their best to avoid that. I personally try to avoid giving alerts when it's someone I'm in dispute with to reduce any intimidatory effect, but it's not always possible. It's unfortunate that you find the edit filter so intimidating, but as I mentioned, in that case your only real choice it to stop editing here, except it's sort of too late. Nil Einne (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Contentious topics is a part of the English wikipedia. If you don't want to be given alerts recorded in the edit filter, I'm afraid your only real option is to refrain from editing the English wikipedia. In theory, you can try to edit only areas not part of some contentious topic, but in practice this would likely entail so much work on your part that it's IMO not worth it. It's sort of a moot point now since you've already chosen to edit the English wikipedia in an area covered by contentious topics. However the WP:RTV does exist, so you if you wish to, you could have your account renamed and leave here for ever. Note that because of global accounts, this would also affect your account on the German wikipedia, so you will need to deal with whatever goes on there. I do not know if their rules would allow it especially if you want to continue editing. It's possible they will provided you make a new account and clearly link your vanished account to the new account. Note that in that case, it would still be possible for editors to look into the German wikipedia to find out your new account name, however since you are not editing here, no one could mention any such details here. Nil Einne (talk) 11:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- You just reworded what I said. Secondly, I do not have a problem with the notice itself. I find it actually usefull. I have a problem with the log entry. Anyways, as you want me to assume good faith (wich I already did in my very first reply to this) I do that. Thirdly, adminestrative does in no way mean 'done by an admin'. Adminestrative action is the simple way of 'keeping track' or 'to apply something to something' and log entries are, by the very nature of this, adminestrative. And, as i said, happy editing -- Adtonko (talk) 18:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- That is not actually a correct statement. You made an edit to a talk page which is covered by the contentious topics procedure. Per that procedure, you're supposed to be alerted (and since it is your first time receiving an alert in that topic area, the use of the above template is *mandatory*) *specifically* with an alert that will be captured under Edit Filter 602 (the reason for which, being that it allows an editor in the future to be able to check the SystemLog under filter 602 to identify if you've ever received a prior alert for that topic area; if so, there is a different template we are supposed to use.). That is not an "administrative action." Indeed, this can, and regularly is, be performed by non-admins. Further, the template explicitly notes that there is no implication that there is a problem with your editing. I'll caution you to assume good faith, and not cast aspersions about regular, standard notifications. Nobody is requiring you to edit in a contentious topic area, that is your choice alone. If you make that choice, you are subject to the increased scrutiny that comes with editing in such a topic area, and the requisite alerts and notifications thereof. If you find being notified about our policies that intimidating, you're always welcome to choose to edit less contentious areas of the project instead. Your call. In any event, best of luck. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 18:16, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- You can just remove it once you've seen it, if you like. The alert issuance will have been stored in the system log for future reference; in theory you shouldn't get another alert for edits within the same topic area. Of course, you can also always use the Ctopics/aware template to indicate in advance which areas you're aware of, as well. Best, ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
August 2024
[edit]
Hello, I'm Frost. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Cascavel Airport, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Frost 12:34, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- the source is in the link that already exists in the article. Adtonko (talk) 12:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)