User talk:Avisnacks

Comment on Comey firing naming
Hi, Thanks for your edits on the Comey article. Please feel free to offer your comments on the article naming debate if you are inclined. --MC

A page you started (Maimon ben Joseph) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Maimon ben Joseph, Avisnacks!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"I will add wikilinks and a stub and refimprove tag. Please add more references."

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 10:31, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Alert
&mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 09:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018
To enforce an arbitration decision and for violating the sanctions already in place, specifically you did not get the required consensus before restoring a challenged edit on the page Racial views of Donald Trump, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week 24 hours. 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:. 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. &mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 16:17, 22 January 2018 (UTC)  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."


 * Copied, per your request. SQL Query me!  19:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement action appeal by Avisnacks
''Procedural notes: The rules governing arbitration enforcement appeals are found here. According to the procedures, a "clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors" is required to overturn an arbitration enforcement action. To help determine any such consensus, involved editors may make brief statements in separate sections but should not edit the section for discussion among uninvolved editors. Editors are normally considered involved if they are in a current dispute with the sanctioning or sanctioned editor, or have taken part in disputes (if any) related to the contested enforcement action. Administrators having taken administrative actions are not normally considered involved for this reason alone (see WP:UNINVOLVED).''


 * Appealing user : – Avisnacks (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Sanction being appealed : Appealing sanction for restoring my original edit by posting my new edit

I added a new subsection called "Is Trump a racist?" to the "Analysis" subsection. Under "Is Trump a racist?" I added a "No" subsection and a "Yes" subsection and populated them with direct quotes from sources (opinion writers of major news publications, Trump himself, and Ivana Trump) that either specifically called Trump a racist or defended him from the accusation.

That edit was reverted because of "non-encyclopedic SYNTH and OR".

I posted a new edit with much of the same source material and was sanctioned for this post.


 * Administrator imposing the sanction :


 * Notification of that administrator : The appealing editor is asked to notify the administrator who made the enforcement action of this appeal, and then to replace this text with a diff of that notification. The appeal may not be processed otherwise. If a block is appealed, the editor moving the appeal to this board should make the notification.

Statement by Avisnacks
In my new post, I restructured the information (which is well-sourced and as yet unreverted) in order to integrate it organically into the content of the article. My original edit was reverted because I had created a new subsection called "Is Trump a racist?" which purportedly violated the SYNTH policy. I therefore remedied the issue by integrating the material (the material itself was never an issue because it was clearly notable, relevant, and well-sourced) within the preexisting article structure.

Additionally, in my new edit, I only updated the article with some of the content from my original edit.

If anything, the editing process worked the way it was supposed to with the two of us editors working in concert to achieve a better article.

Regardless, I have certainly learned to be more careful with edits on pages that are subject to sanction. As an editor, I have always tried to ensure that my edits draw no independent conclusions, but rather summarize conclusions reached by multiple, reliable sources. I will continue to endeavor to do the same.

Statement by Coffee
This was a clear violation of the consensus required restriction; what's worse is that just hours before violating the restriction, they had been directly notified on their talkpage that DS applied in the area. The editnotice was clear as it could possibly be (and they were not editing on a mobile device, so they undoubtedly saw it): consensus is required before reinstating any challenged edit. The user even here states that they reinstated challenged material; I don't think they could have made it any clearer that they deliberately refused to follow the sanctions system in place. Therefore, I strictly oppose any lifting of this sanction. &mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 18:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Result of the appeal by Avisnacks

 * This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.



L'Affaire Russe listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect L&. Since you had some involvement with the L'Affaire Russe redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pam D  08:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

L'Affaire Russe listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect L&. Since you had some involvement with the L'Affaire Russe redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — JFG talk 08:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about High Level Military Group
Hello, Avisnacks,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether High Level Military Group should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/High Level Military Group.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Jamez42 (talk) 00:59, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Natural math moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Natural math, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Natural math
Hello, Avisnacks. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Natural math, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:03, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Natural math


Hello, Avisnacks. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Natural math".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:02, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Natural math


Hello, Avisnacks. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Natural math".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Natural math


Hello, Avisnacks. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Natural math".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:03, 3 October 2023 (UTC)