→Barbara O’Neil: new section
|
|||
Line 224: | Line 224: | ||
<small>Sent by [[m:User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)</small> |
<small>Sent by [[m:User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)</small> |
||
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=25302831 --> |
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=25302831 --> |
||
== Barbara O’Neil == |
|||
I have used many of Barbara’s natural remedy with great success. |
|||
shame on you and your lies [[User:B0HICA77|B0HICA77]] ([[User talk:B0HICA77|talk]]) 14:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC) |
This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Philip_Cross. | ![]() |
|
|||
I have blocked you for one year as an arbitration action for breaching both your topic ban from British politics, imposed by ArbCom in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/BLP issues on British politics articles, and your topic ban from "living people who are significantly involved in politics, broadly construed (including, but not limited to, candidates, activists, and political journalists or commentators)", imposed by me under the auspices of WP:NEWBLPBAN. After that year, the block continues indefinitely as a regular admin block for disruptive editing.
The violation that caused this block is this. I will take a moment to explain why I am electing to impose the maximum DS block length for an edit that, on its surface, may appear fairly minor:
If this had been a case of adding some other template to her article, it would be a minimal violation of the TBANs, and I would have probably responded with an only warning. But this specific template linked to content you had written that would have much more squarely violated your TBANs if written on this wiki, and which show you knew she was engaged in political journalism.
I can view this as nothing other than trying to game the system yet again. There is no reason to expect a warning will suffice where three blocks haven't. There is no reason to expect broadening your BLP TBAN will suffice when you've flouted the current one at the first opportunity. And so I conclude there is no adequate preventative remedy other than an indefinite block, the first year as an AE action. The paperwork for that is included below.
AE block template (this links to the British Politics case but the block will be logged under BLP as well) |
---|
![]()
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: 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." |
-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 14:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not an administrator, but personally I hope that one day Philip Cross is given another chance to edit on Wikipedia. He has made over 200,000 helpful edits on a wide variety of different topics. It's unfortunate that issues have arisen about a British politics ban. He has apologised for edits to the biography of the journalist Hadley Freeman and I think it would be a shame if Philip's overall contribution to Wikipedia was permanently lost. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 12:21, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 53, September – October 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 7 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Media Lens/Archive 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 6 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Media Lens/Archive 6 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 5 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Media Lens/Archive 5 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 4 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Media Lens/Archive 4 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 3 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Media Lens/Archive 3 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Media Lens/Archive 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Respect Party/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Respect Party/Archive 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Nick Cohen/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Nick Cohen/Archive 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Richard Littlejohn/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Richard Littlejohn/Archive 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Oliver Kamm/Archive 1 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Oliver Kamm/Archive 1 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mary Whitehouse/Archive 3 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Mary Whitehouse/Archive 3 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mary Whitehouse/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 30 § Mary Whitehouse/Archive 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]