user talk:Gabetucker2

Ohio State University

Why would you do this? It makes absolutely no sense at all to replace a huge chunk of the article with a template. - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for stopping by.

I did this because the History of Ohio State University article has a section containing the exact same information. I replaced both "Significant historical events" sections of the two articles with a template so that there is one centralized location for this section between the two OSU-related articles, removing redundancy therebetween. Such is the purpose of templates.

Gabetucker2 (talk) 04:39, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed my template change.

That's fine, but I would like to address the issue of redundancy between the Significant historical events sections of the two articles. Please provide an alternative proposition to fix this issue if you don't wish to use my template solution.

Gabetucker2 (talk) 04:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a reason for that. History of Ohio State University was created as a second article to make sure Ohio State University didn't get so large. The main article could have a summary of the school's history, while maintaining overall article size. The more detailed complete history could then be moved to the history article (hence the "main article" link to the history article at the top of the history section on the OSU article). There is no reason for both articles to have an exact duplicate of the entire history, and especially in template form like that.

Also, may I ask, how are you related to User:Onlineone22? You both have a very similar writing and editing style. Is this a second account? - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:00, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there—just for anyone else stopping by, I answered your question regarding whether this is a second account on my Onlineone22 account in the appeal page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Request_for_6-month_Israel-Arab_conflict_topic_ban_to_be_overturned

As for your main question: I don't want an exact duplicate of the entire history section. I want an exact duplicate of Significant historical events, which is distinguished from the History overview sections on each page (History of Ohio State University's section being longer, and Ohio State University's section being shorter). Significant historical events should have a spot on each page in full length (that's how it is for Ohio State University currently; the only change I made was to mirror this on History of Ohio State University since it's certainly relevant on the history page). And, like you said, History of Ohio State University is distinguished in length by its History overview section. Hopefully this clears up my intentions.

Gabetucker2 (talk) 22:50, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for WP:ECR violations, topic ban violations, alternate account Onlineone22 is topic banned, evading scrutiny, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 month. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement topic ban

The following topic ban now applies to you:

You are indefinitely topic banned from the Arab/Israel conflict, broadly construed

You have been sanctioned ECR violations, topic ban violations, and evading scrutiny

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.

If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:24, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish

Hey, I hope you're doing well. What can I do to demonstrate good-faith efforts on Wikipedia to improve and therefore eventually appeal the lifting of the topic ban?

Gabetucker2 (talk) 06:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit constructively in other areas, don't use alternate accounts to violate the topic ban, and listen to the advice given below. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note

If I may may offer some observations and advice: from what I have seen of your editing, you are well-intentioned and have potential to make positive contributions to wikipedia. The problem though is that in your rush to contribute you have been steamrolling over policies, guidelines and norms, which, even if you don't appreciate it at the moment, have been established with considerable thought and experience. Worse, your newbie errors affected one of the most contentious topics areas on wikipedia where such mistakes cause greater chaos and are less tolerated (which is exactly why this area is subject to extended confirmed restrictions).

That said, I don't think the current topic ban and block is necessarily the end of the line for you on wikipedia. If you do decide to return, (1) slow down, (2) ask for advice and, (3) listen to feedback that is offered. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 02:32, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Abecedare Thank you very much for your advice and kind words. I'll try to do better when I come back at respecting the guidelines. Gabetucker2 (talk) 23:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]