69:, "A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Knowledge, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Knowledge editors decide whether to add the link." — I'll look over the link and see if it is worth keeping. -
511:
355:
220:
I have blocked both yourself and Bridge & Tunnel for 24 hours for repeated reverting. I don't see why others should suffer by having a page locked if two users are reverting each other. I understand you may feel that B&T has been disruptive but our polices on reversions only legitimise it for
472:
I am doing some
Wallace related research. I think we may be on the same page about some of this. From seeing your experience, I know there will be some push-back. My project is a bit different, but we expect to have hundreds of citations. I'm looking for a little guidance as well as maybe some help
235:
I am willing to discuss further with Bridge & Tunnel to form a consensus on what information to include; however, it's getting evident that Bridge & Tunnel plain refuses to listen to other people's (not just mine) explanations of
Knowledge policy, so I guess I'll have to try other avenues
314:
Generally, a user-conduct RFC is seen as a pretty serious step. Before dispute resolution and article RfC's have even been tried or offered, I'm very hesitant to certify one, and I'm not sure this case rises to that level. I think the AfD is probably a better step to resolve the questionable
249:
Hmm, I don't paticularly think that Bridge and
Tunnell is acting in bad faith. His reverting is a bad thing but he's not edited for getting on two days. Rather than go doubt the route of the RfC, I think the best way of possibly solving the problem would be to list
271:
Thanks for the suggestion. I've also considered putting up the Frank R. Wallace article for AfD, but since the {{Notability}} tag has only been up for a short while I was wondering if it's good to start an AfD so soon. Should I start an AfD immediately?
537:
until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
331:
I'm doing that, but I think it's a huge waste of time. I don't see why someone else should be able to get away with throwing abusive remarks around for weeks on end, while I have to go through some bureaucratic procedure just to stop that.
541:
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
575:. 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
254:
for deletion. If the community decides he's worth keeping, then we can work to provide decent sources for it. If not, then the article is gone. I don't think an RfC is the route to go down yet. --
534:
166:. He makes the straightforward claim of unconstitutional tyranny, with less detail and substantiation than is available dozens of other places; starting, I believe, with the
367:
523:
600:
489:
447:
Wikistalking to retaliate against an edit you don't like can result in a block. Please adhere to
Knowledge rules and policies.
596:
109:
a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the
587:
describes the
Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
592:
102:
140:
Renominating an article for deletion over and over is disruptive. After the AfD "failure", I would recommend using
527:
98:
66:
196:
195:
Stop vandalizing articles. You are deleting cited info. You are also deleting my comments from talk pages.
485:
225:, which this isn't a case of. Cool off, try and discuss further and don't react to users by reverting. --
481:
477:
366:
to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage,
588:
320:
564:
555:
425:
417:
122:
584:
568:
251:
106:
583:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
171:
73:
97:
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be
580:
572:
255:
226:
149:
576:
448:
363:
167:
145:
49:
26:
421:
393:
316:
141:
115:
65:
Hi, you shouldn't really add external links to sites you maintain. See the policy
70:
424:
to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please
113:
of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. —
518:
502:
458:
333:
294:
273:
237:
206:
181:
83:
36:
473:
on the site to protect some edits. Are you still active, interested?
354:
29:
148:. Using the same approach over and over again isn't going to work.
571:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Knowledge
604:
549:
493:
461:
451:
336:
325:
297:
276:
258:
240:
229:
209:
199:
184:
174:
152:
127:
86:
76:
52:
39:
35:
Well, I'll say that I agree with the US law which you quoted.
293:
I've decided to go ahead and start an AfD. Sorry and thanks.
535:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Neo-Tech (2nd nomination)
315:
notability. Have you offered or tried any other methods in
516:
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article
522:
is suitable for inclusion in
Knowledge according to
563:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
437:This message delivered: 22:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
368:Knowledge:Requests for mediation/Frank R. Wallace
457:Thanks, but I know a scarecrow when I see one.
205:I have grounds for deleting them. Thank you.
8:
420:, an automated bot account operated by the
349:
426:contact the Mediation Committee directly
136:Going down the same path over and over
7:
236:once the 24 hours is up. Thank you.
524:Knowledge's policies and guidelines
468:Help with some research/maintenance
21:You're not seriously suggesting we
14:
589:review the candidates' statements
533:The article will be discussed at
101:from editing Knowledge under the
509:
353:
105:, which states that nobody may
595:. For the Election committee,
565:Arbitration Committee election
556:ArbCom elections are now open!
1:
605:13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
326:22:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
298:15:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
277:13:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
259:10:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
241:15:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
230:14:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
210:07:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
200:07:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
153:21:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
494:18:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
435:
388:For the Mediation Committee,
216:3RR and Revert Warring Block
185:17:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
175:15:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
53:12:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
40:07:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
30:02:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
591:and submit your choices on
128:03:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
620:
597:MediaWiki message delivery
550:05:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
416:This message delivered by
462:03:28, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
452:19:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
337:07:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
191:Do not vandalize articles
87:11:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
77:11:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
526:or whether it should be
48:I guess that's a start.
164:The Story of New Jersey
25:on something, are you?
569:Arbitration Committee
364:Request for Mediation
346:Request for Mediation
162:William Starr Myers:
573:arbitration process
422:Mediation Committee
197:Bridge & Tunnel
16:
585:arbitration policy
497:
480:comment added by
434:
433:
430:
324:
223:obvious vandalism
119:
103:three-revert rule
611:
547:
545:Ten Pound Hammer
513:
512:
496:
474:
414:
396:
392:
357:
350:
323:
310:User conduct RFC
252:Frank R. Wallace
126:
117:
619:
618:
614:
613:
612:
610:
609:
608:
593:the voting page
559:
543:
514:
510:
507:
475:
470:
445:
440:
429:
394:
390:
348:
312:
218:
193:
172:Septentrionalis
160:
138:
114:
95:
63:
19:
12:
11:
5:
617:
615:
562:
558:
553:
508:
506:
501:Nomination of
499:
469:
466:
465:
464:
444:
441:
432:
431:
415:
413:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
360:
358:
347:
344:
342:
340:
339:
311:
308:
307:
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
284:
283:
282:
281:
280:
279:
264:
263:
262:
261:
244:
243:
217:
214:
213:
212:
192:
189:
188:
187:
159:
156:
137:
134:
132:
94:
91:
90:
89:
82:Done, thanks.
62:
61:External links
59:
58:
57:
56:
55:
43:
42:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
616:
607:
606:
602:
598:
594:
590:
586:
582:
578:
574:
570:
566:
557:
554:
552:
551:
546:
539:
536:
531:
529:
525:
521:
520:
504:
500:
498:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
467:
463:
460:
456:
455:
454:
453:
450:
442:
438:
427:
423:
419:
397:
389:
386:
385:
384:
383:
382:
381:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
374:
373:
372:
371:
369:
365:
361:
359:
356:
352:
351:
345:
343:
338:
335:
330:
329:
328:
327:
322:
321:Seraphimblade
318:
309:
299:
296:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
278:
275:
270:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
260:
257:
253:
248:
247:
246:
245:
242:
239:
234:
233:
232:
231:
228:
224:
215:
211:
208:
204:
203:
202:
201:
198:
190:
186:
183:
179:
178:
177:
176:
173:
169:
168:Liberty Lobby
165:
157:
155:
154:
151:
147:
143:
135:
133:
130:
129:
124:
120:
112:
108:
104:
100:
92:
88:
85:
81:
80:
79:
78:
75:
72:
68:
60:
54:
51:
47:
46:
45:
44:
41:
38:
34:
33:
32:
31:
28:
24:
560:
544:
540:
532:
517:
515:
505:for deletion
482:ChuckWingate
476:— Preceding
471:
446:
443:Wikistalking
436:
418:MediationBot
387:
341:
313:
222:
219:
194:
163:
161:
139:
131:
110:
96:
71:FrancisTyers
64:
22:
20:
17:lowtax's law
158:Reliability
581:topic bans
577:site bans
256:Robdurbar
227:Robdurbar
150:Electrawn
519:Neo-Tech
503:Neo-Tech
490:contribs
478:unsigned
180:Thanks!
50:Avriette
27:Avriette
528:deleted
99:blocked
567:. The
146:WP:RFC
111:effect
107:revert
23:agreed
395:demon
317:WP:DR
142:WP:3O
601:talk
486:talk
123:talk
116:Mets
67:here
561:Hi,
548:•
449:THF
144:or
118:501
93:3rr
603:)
579:,
530:.
492:)
488:•
459:Bi
370:.
362:A
334:Bi
319:?
295:Bi
274:Bi
238:Bi
207:Bi
182:Bi
170:.
84:Bi
37:Bi
599:(
484:(
439:.
428:.
391:^
125:)
121:(
74:·
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.