User talk:StanislasWiener/Archive1

November 2016
Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia with this username. This is because your username, WienerLibraryWIR, implies shared use. I have read your declaration that the account is for only one person, but policy proscribes usernames which imply multiple use and another WIR might follow you. Also, if this claim is true, please indicate that you understand that test edits are undesirable, most especially test edits proposing deletion. You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:
 * Adding on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
 * At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
 * Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Changing username.

If you think that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. SpinningSpark 18:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I have unblocked you to allow you to request a change of username (which apparently cannot be processed this week due to a software update). However, I am still concerned that I am not hearing from you that you understand that nominating pages for speedy deletion as a test is disruptive. It wastes administrators time reviewing the request, and may have led to the actual deletion of the article. Even worse, readers will see the message and get entirely the wrong impression of the article. It is quite irrelevant that another user agreed to you doing this. Your statement that "he agreed to let me add a 'speedy deletion' tag to his article" shows a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the principles of Wikipedia. Nobody "owns" any article, even if they are the only contributor. It is not "his" article, see WP:OWN. The articles are owned by the community as a whole. SpinningSpark 19:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I understand and I sincerely apologise. This was my very first edit-a-thon. Wikimedia UK should train us better to run edit-a-thons.WienerLibraryWIR (talk) 19:57, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The principle is really very simple, and does not just apply to editathons; if you want to run tests or demonstrations, then you should do it in user space or draft space, or, if you have a project running for the editathon, in the Wikipedia namespace for the project. Edits in the main article space should always be useful edits for the encyclopaedia.  No training should be necessary for that.  All experienced editors should be working that way. SpinningSpark 20:19, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You are correct of course and I should have thought of deleting a draft instead. I do not understand why Andrew seemed to agree I should do it during the edit-a-thon. We must have misunderstood each other. To be honest, I feel betrayed that he did not just come and speak to me directly about this. The rest of the edit-a-thon was a phenomenal success, so the wisest course of action may be to forgive and forget. Thank you again for your great advice!WienerLibraryWIR (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The blocking of this account appears to have been too hasty. The relevant policy suggests"If you encounter an inappropriate username as described above, there are various actions you might take. Use common sense ... If you see a username that is problematic but was not obviously created in bad faith, politely draw the user's attention to this policy, and try to encourage them to create a new account with a different username. ... Generally, editors whose usernames are a technical or borderline violation of the Username policy should be given an opportunity to discuss the username and how they may register a new username."


 * As for the speedy deletion, it appeared that the nominator thought that the topic in question was dubious. My expectation was that an administrator would be along in a few minutes to settle the matter.  We did not have time to discuss this in detail because of the circumstances of the editathon – a busy affair with lots to do in a short space of time.  I improved the article in question and am now following up by watching over the work started by the attendees such as Alan Montefiore, which has already encountered difficulty.  Such difficulties are commonplace in Wikipedia and WP:LIGHTBULB describes the process well.  We should try to avoid burning out by falling over each other in this way.
 * Andrew D. (talk) 08:43, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * If it had only been a question of username then I would not have immediately blocked. Actually, I would probably never have noticed in the first place.  I was much more concerned about someone nominating an article for speedy deletion as a test.  Given that this was in the context of an ongoing editathon, it was not clear to me whether further "tests" would be made.  The disruption was current, and potentially ongoing, which together with the username issue justified a block.  As for your claim that it "appeared that the nominator thought that the topic in question was dubious" both the nominator and yourself have indicated that this was done as a test, which together with the lack of a rationale in the nomination makes that claim rather disingenuous.
 * Yes, an administrator did come along to deal with it. That was me.  If you want to nominate inappropriate articles for speedy deletion as a demonstration, then you can expect your next demonstration to be how to deal with an unblock request.  Pages genuinely needing speedy tags are easy to find, are just as good for a demonstration, and tagging them performs a useful function for the encyclopaedia. SpinningSpark 14:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. We have all learned from this and we do not need to discuss this further. The edit-a-thon was a phenomenal success and I have received many thank-you messages from the attendees. That is all we need to remember.WienerLibraryWIR (talk) 14:43, 21 November 2016 (UTC)