User talk:EnochBethany
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Syrian Civil War / 'Syrian 21st century war'
[edit]Hi, please see my new posting on Talk:Syrian Civil War#Is the title correct, "Civil War"?. --Corriebertus (talk) 15:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
January 2016
[edit]
This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at Talk:Natural-born-citizen clause, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stop with the fringe living persons violations. Dave Dial (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- The same goes for Talk:Frank Marshall Davis. Just stop. Jonathunder (talk) 20:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Gamaliel (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Blocked
[edit]You were given warnings directly above. You chose to remove the warnings and add the information on your talk page that you were warned about. As a result, you are blocked.
Any administrator is welcome to unblock you (without consulting me) provided that you state that you understand the message Gamaliel placed just above this and that you agree not to make such edits again. Jonathunder (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
EnochBethany (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
No defamation occurred. And I did no editing to the article after the warning. The alleged grounds are what I put on my talk page, which constituted no disruption to Wikipedia whatsoever. Cleaning the offensive & unjust bloiler plate off my talk page was no crime & no disruption. Adding this statement ON MY OWN TALK PAGE without reference to any person or article was no violation of any known Wikipedia rule: "Interesting How Persons Get So Heated Over Their Political Heroes Adding the word "possibly" in front of a claim of parentage, when there is no actual evidence of who the father is, is not adding poorly sourced material." I did not receive any warning about posting on my own talk page, & the out of context statement above pertains to no particular person or article. Nor did a warner identify himself as an administrator. The statement is false that "You chose to . . . add the information on your talk page that you were warned about." I did not add the information about which I was warned. I said nothing in my statement about any person whatsoever; I just posted a principle. The statement on my own talk page does not disrupt Wikipedia. Is any administrator interested in fairness & justice?
Decline reason:
I have examined your recent contributions and have considered the warnings you were given and your reaction to them, and this unblock request does not come close to addressing the problem. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
(EnochBethany (talk) 03:54, 2 February 2016 (UTC))
My appeal is based on justice, as posted above. (EnochBethany (talk) 17:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC))
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, EnochBethany. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)