Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Administrators' noticeboard page. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, several subpages of Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard redirect here. |
![]() | This is not the page to report problems to administrators, or discuss administrative issues.
This page is for discussion of the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard page (and some of its subpages, including /Incidents).
|
![]() | This noticeboard has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
Index
|
|||||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 8 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Admins encouraging bigotry and religious discrimination
[edit]I recently had a thread where I asked for a warning to be aimed at a user for, as he new editor in question put it, "insulting a religious group". Note that the thread closer, @CambridgeBayWeather:, said the user had also received a warning. I see no example of this. (The user received a warning from CambridgeBayWeather, which the user acknowledged, and then deleted.)
One of the administrators who also made anti-neopagan comments subsequently apologized for his behavior ([1]), @Cullen328:.
However, after reading the comments from admins on the thread, the new user in question, @Jared Hanson III:, has decided that it was never a problem that he was "insulting a religious group". In fact, after reading a few admins dismiss any concerns about his actions, some even joining in on it, Jared Hanson III posted the following on my user page:
- Funny, the administrators at ANI didn't seem to think anything was wrong with my behavior, many of them actually lauded how I behaved myself and warned you they could go after you with the bite tag. Perhaps you need to get over yourself and stop having a victim complex and move on. I withdraw my apology as I did nothing wrong. ([2])
If it is in fact now OK to make discriminatory and bigoted comments about specific religious groups on Wikipedia, we ought to have some kind of chart outlining which are OK to discriminate against and express bigotry toward and which are not.
For example, I'm pretty sure the same comment made by Jared Hanson III about Jews, Muslims, and Christians would lead to an account getting indefinitely zapped pretty much immediately, apology or not.
But when it comes to neopaganism, some admins who responded in the above thread have, intentionally or not, encouraged this user to think it's OK to make derisive comments about adherents of specific religious groups. And we even had some admins there do exactly the same.
Pinging also @Yngvadottir:, @Ealdgyth:, who are involved with this discussion on separate discussions. :bloodofox: (talk) 01:37, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Is this in the right place? WT:AN? I'm going to inform Liz of its existence, since Cullen got a ping. Still looking for the warning; maybe it was on the article talk page? Yngvadottir (talk) 02:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I admit that I was in a bad mood at that moment for reasons unrelated to Wikipedia and allowed myself to make a sarcastic and dismissive comment, which I regret. When I woke up the next morning, I was disappointed in myself, and apologized to both of the editors on my user talk page. I again apologize to you, Bloodofox and regret that I made that snarky remark. I am truly sorry. Cullen328 (talk) 02:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks again, Cullen. Jared Hanson III has continued to be uncivil, so I've just given him a level 3 warning. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Bloodofox is not helping their case, telling Jared Hanson III to delete their account. Both editors need to step away from the other, enforced if needed. CMD (talk) 03:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed as to the desirability of their walking away from each other, except that he's still throwing unsubstantiated accusations of sock puppetry. I suspect that AN/I being what it is, it was assumed that Bloodofox was asking for a block; asking for a stern word about civility was entirely justified, as subsequent actions have borne out. (Looking forward to their filing an SPI on me; I think it will be my first, always up for new adventures). Yngvadottir (talk) 04:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Which one is the he and where are the sock accusations? I don't see those here or at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Bigotry at Talk:Germanic peoples. CMD (talk) 04:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, Chipmunkdavis, by "he" I mean Jared Hanson III, at his talk page: see remarks at 02:16 and 03:18 in this state of the page and this edit summary for the second of two removals. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Which one is the he and where are the sock accusations? I don't see those here or at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Bigotry at Talk:Germanic peoples. CMD (talk) 04:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed as to the desirability of their walking away from each other, except that he's still throwing unsubstantiated accusations of sock puppetry. I suspect that AN/I being what it is, it was assumed that Bloodofox was asking for a block; asking for a stern word about civility was entirely justified, as subsequent actions have borne out. (Looking forward to their filing an SPI on me; I think it will be my first, always up for new adventures). Yngvadottir (talk) 04:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Bloodofox is not helping their case, telling Jared Hanson III to delete their account. Both editors need to step away from the other, enforced if needed. CMD (talk) 03:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks again, Cullen. Jared Hanson III has continued to be uncivil, so I've just given him a level 3 warning. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- The warning was here to which they replied and then they removed it. Something they are permitted to do. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 11:12, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, I have updated my summary above. :bloodofox: (talk) 11:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- For record-keeping purposes, even though this is on an out-of-the-way page, I note that since being indeffed, Jared Hanson III has continued to cast aspersions and to express bigotry against neopaganism on his talk page, most recently in an edit summary on a deletion in which his ignorance is blatant. I'm not pinging him and I haven't posted to his talk page except for the warning I mentioned above, because I don't want to seem to be gravedancing. But this is religious bigotry, it's corrosive to the community, and we should be very clear in condemning it. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for highlighting this, I had not seen it. Agreed. I think any admin who downplayed this, danced around it, and, in some cases, even joined in with this editor's blatant bigotry really needs to take some time to reflect, at the very least. We need some changes around here. As a reminder, this user responded to a gentle disagreement with explicit bigotry. The way this was initially handled is unacceptable. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:37, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've pulled talk page access. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:42, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Disruptive behaviour and threatening by "M.Bitton"
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am new to Wikipedia, and some minutes in here I am already getting harrassed by another editor.
Under the article "Talk:Imane Khalif", some editors including myself were pointing that the article was not objective enough. Then "M.Bitton" started saying that the article was neutral and objective. When I asked him why he claims it to be, he refused to answer. He also claimed that I violated a policy, while I simply stated that controversies exist, without claiming if they were true or not.
When I asked him to explain his claims, he said that I attacked him personally and threatened me of reporting me, which I do not accept:
Me: Ok so this means you admit you are biaised. I will not ping you, but then refrain from stepping in this discussion without bringing anything constructive (since you neither explain why you pretend this article is objective, nor clarify the meaning of your ambiguous claims)
"M.Bitton": You're "new", so you get a pass, but further personal attacks will earn you a trip to WP:ANI.
Please refer to the point "too subjective article" under Talk:Imane Khelif - Wikipedia. Fanny.doutaz (talk) 14:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- One thing I'm certain of, this person is not new to Wikipedia and has not been here for just "some minutes". This is an old hand. I think I hear the faint sound of quacking.... 10mmsocket (talk) 14:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you think I am an alt account of that other person who was also fighting with "M.Britton", then you are wrong. Wikipedia can verify my location and device information by looking into my IP address and device UUID. You seem to be making baseless claims either because of a confusion or because you are allied with the person who bullied me (or you are one of their accounts). In any case, I believe that the Administrators should be able to judge who is right, based on the history logged on the page. Fanny.doutaz (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- A 'new' editor? Hmmmm. GoodDay (talk) 14:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- As I said, Wikipedia will be able to verify this fact. It is also completely irrevant to the topic that I have started, so kindly refrain from discussing this. Fanny.doutaz (talk) 14:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, let's not focus on the discussion of new or not. Again Wikipedia can determine this in case of need. The focus here is that "M.Bitton" had disruptive behaviour threatened me. Fanny.doutaz (talk) 15:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- As I said, Wikipedia will be able to verify this fact. It is also completely irrevant to the topic that I have started, so kindly refrain from discussing this. Fanny.doutaz (talk) 14:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- A 'new' editor? Hmmmm. GoodDay (talk) 14:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you think I am an alt account of that other person who was also fighting with "M.Britton", then you are wrong. Wikipedia can verify my location and device information by looking into my IP address and device UUID. You seem to be making baseless claims either because of a confusion or because you are allied with the person who bullied me (or you are one of their accounts). In any case, I believe that the Administrators should be able to judge who is right, based on the history logged on the page. Fanny.doutaz (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Loophole
[edit]I think we should start being more aggressive about moving complaints from this talk page to the main board. I don't think it's fair to let folks post complaints that name others on this lower traffic talk page which also doesn't have the requirement that the editor be notified of the discussion. For example, I don't think @M.Bitton above received either a ping or a user talk notification that their behavior was being discussed on a serious user behavior board, which I think is unfair. In the section above, CambridgeBayWeather was pinged, but like M.Bitton, did not receive a proper user talk notification. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:36, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- For the thread directly above this one, they probably posted on this page because they were unable to post on the main noticeboard. Due to an LTA, we've had to protect AN for a while now. The thread above that one, though, should definitely have been posted on AN rather than here. —Ingenuity (t • c) 02:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) In general, I think that we should have some way to just go ahead and move them to the project page. One problem we are dealing with is that there is someone who is jumping on Res proxies on the near daily to vandalize AN(I), which is making us semi-protect it, and thereby pushomg IPs/non-autoconfirmed users here. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Protection
[edit]This page needs to be protected for at least 2 weeks or have pending changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellocat99 (talk • contribs) 15:38, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hellocat99: Do you mean protecting the talk page we're currently on? Per Wikipedia:Protection policy, that's only done in response to significant vandalism and disruption. While the discussions above might have been in the wrong place, I think they're nowhere near vandalism. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:57, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
I ment this talk page that that vandal kept vandalizing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellocat99 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Request for Guidance on Vaibhav Palhade Draft Article
[edit]![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Purple_arrow_right.svg/20px-Purple_arrow_right.svg.png)