Jump to content

User talk:C.Fred

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sadko (talk | contribs) at 10:57, 4 October 2024 (rsp.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hmm

I'm not quite sure about this edit, C.Fred--the joint looks clean, and I'm sure we could both use that treatment. Drmies (talk) 00:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Illbliss Page

Hi! C.Fred,


I am actually working on making this page better, I see that you are reversing my edits. Can you allow me finish work on it? Ajatontiriajabale (talk) 11:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now. Thank you. I have adjusted it. Ajatontiriajabale (talk) 12:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions to the September 11 attacks

Thank you for your reversion to the deletion of text by User:Mcdafold. Could I just point-out that this was the 4th time that this person has deleted this portion of text recently and is thus "edit warring". They seem to take no notice of editors advice and warnings. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 20:45, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@David J Johnson The other two reverts were on the 12th, so it's not a 3RR brightline violation, but it is edit warring. —C.Fred (talk) 21:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Gundulić

Hello Fred, could you please review the recent edits on the page? A newbie has added a category based on a list from a notable book. Despite this, two editors are actively removing the category, seemingly in full WP:IDONTLIKEIT mode. Additionally, one of them is referencing an old sanction from several months ago in their diff, hoping that this will justify their actions. In my book, that's personal attack. Could you protect the page and intervene as you see appropriate? I have no desire to get into an edit war with these individuals.Thank you. — Sadko (words are wind) 20:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sadko, who was blocked three years ago for POV pushing https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&oldid=1013108504#Request_concerning_Sadko he was accidentally released because the administrator forgot about him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guerillero/Archives/2024/July. I reviewed his edits so you know.154.205.128.71 (talk) 21:00, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And the IP stalker is here, nice. Another diff which requires your attention, alongside the mentioned IP. Thanks in advance. — Sadko (words are wind) 21:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but did not know the sanction was lifted (as did not recently admin Joy), and as saw you were actively editing/participating in discussions on talk pages, I wrote in the edit summary to take it to the talk page (because of the fact the edits were controversial and better to be discussed rather than having edit war). There was no "IDONTLIKEIT" nor "hoping... justify their actions" or personal attacks on my behalf (and most probably User:Silverije as well). So easily making up direct aspersions on others with lack of WP:FAITH based on a short and neutral edit summary (at least mine), while doing controversial edits (or reverts, for example and way of discussion at Serbia/Talk:Serbia#Recent changes with User:TylerBurden and User:Iaof2017), going here to an administrator seeking some help instead of simply adressing the content dispute at the article's talk page, calling (Serbian Wikipedia) user Hadjnix a "newbie" (although his fourth account in three years)..., soon after the ban was lifted (without any proper discussion, but seemingly later negative reception), does not seem you understand very well why you were topic banned in the first place, and if anything requires attention - is your behavior, if is like this, are on a way making editing environment of Balkan topics uncomfortable again. Looking on a positive side, Sadko made a lot and good edits, and everyone makes mistakes, if is really willing to do things "differently" and "thoroughly reviewed Wikipedia's policies and guidelines" as claimed, then that would be great. A comment and advice about/to Sadko by admins who were active in his request for topic ban years ago would be welcomed by the editor's community as well, @Joy, Peacemaker67, Bishonen, Vanamonde93, Ymblanter, Drmies, and Guerillero: regards.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 01:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Miki Filigranski about halfway through that dense paragraph I lost track of the sentences, and I don't know why you are pinging me and a bunch of others. Drmies (talk) 01:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Drmies, as stated, you and other pinged admins were active during final result concerning Sadko's indefinite topic ban from ARBEE in 2021, and few months ago it was lifted without any discussion (see admin Joy's commentary), and seemingly passed unnoticed by many. The ban was one among many which had significant importance to the editor's community related to the Balkans. Some commentary about it, and attention/advice on current Sadko's behavior, is required and would be welcomed by the editors. --Miki Filigranski (talk) 02:14, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Miki Filigranski: I lifted the topic ban in July. If you would like for sanctions to be re-imposed, please file a request at AE. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 07:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think those category edits at Gundulić and Bošković and the short description edit at Bošković are a huge problem per se, but they do confirm the pattern of interest in nationalist talking points. There was another bit of that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mašićka Šagovina killings, and I told Sadko that in no uncertain terms. Does all this rise to the level of disruption necessitating a renewal of the ban? Depends on how we value volunteer effort on having to keep tracking it. --Joy (talk) 07:59, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Miki, thanks for saying that you're sorry, it's appreciated. The only goal here is to contribute to Wikipedia by adding new content and collaborating to improve the platform. I have followed WP:NPOV and adhered to the key rules and guidelines, and will continue to do so. Please, as a general rule, avoid making assumptions about what other editors understand or don’t understand — it’s not courteous. It’s a fact that Boskovic was a Ragusan citizen; if I’ve missed some other point you’re trying to communicate, please let me know. If the category in question (which I did not create) is to be deleted, we will remove it completely, and not just on the Gundulic article. If that’s not the case, it’s clear we have different perspectives, and that’s perfectly fine. I won’t be participating in the debate about deleting it, as a courtesy. More importantly, differing opinions are not grounds for mass pinging other editors or using the edit description to post links about those editors (which warrants attention). Nor should the edit description be used to make claims of "irredentist intentions" based on a category, or to pressure or attept to descredit anyone during AFD (even if they are completely mistaken) or other discussions on the talk page. Having different views within the boundaries of Wikipedia’s rules and guidelines is healthy for the project's growth.The question is, how do we express those views and present them to our readers, and that's something which requires extra attention and care. Happy editing, and I wish everyone a good day. — Sadko (words are wind) 10:57, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:C.Fred&oldid=1249330242"