User talk:Viktory02/Archive 10

Discretionary sanctions alerts for gender issues and abo
Doug Weller talk 20:15, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Michael Beschloss
Thank you for your watch on the Michael Beschloss page. Several vandals who only edit that page make me wonder if that is Michael Beschloss himself trying to prevent any criticism of himself. Joeylieberman talk 15:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

No sanctions have been imposed upon you
Replying here for clarity. It's a common misunderstanding for new editors to confuse an alert about the existence of sanctions with having sanctions imposed upon them. You probably noticed that at the top of my talk page I say I've got several discretionary sanctions alerts. They are to let you know of the existence of the sanctions - you should also check talk pages to see if there are any more specific ones. The ones I added are due to your interest in the FRC. Doug Weller talk 15:48, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

"by some" is a phrase to be avoided
"Some" could mean anything - one random commentator for instance. It almost always needs attribution. Elegant News doesn't seem to even say "left-wing" and whoever wrote that doesn't write easily comprehensible English. It isn't a reliable source - see WP:RS so far as I can tell. It's also anonymous - such sources should not be used for BLP articles. Doug Weller talk 16:01, 29 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I've raised his article at WP:BLPN. Don't take that as a comment on you, please. I've also comment on Wikillinois - I gave them the American politics alert and am thinking of blocking them from the two articles they are editing, allowing them to use the talk pages. Doug Weller  talk 16:16, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I'll try to avoid using that phrasing, and as for the user Wikillinois I suspect that that user is possibly Beschloss himself considering the user has only made edits on those pages. Viktory02 talk 16:26, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 11:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert for Covid-19
Doug Weller talk 20:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanction violation
Hello Viktory02. The page Racial views of Donald Trump is subject to the following restriction under Discretionary Sanctions: WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES The article Racial views of Donald Trump is currently subject to discretionary sanctions authorized by active arbitration remedies (see WP:ARBAPDS). An administrator has applied the following restrictions to this article: These restrictions have been imposed pursuant to an arbitration decision which authorized discretionary sanctions for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. If you breach the restriction on this page, you may be blocked or otherwise sanctioned. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial alert. Please edit carefully. Remedy instructions and exemptions Enforcement procedures: Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. Editors who are aware of discretionary sanctions in this topic area and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. Discretionary sanctions can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Discretionary sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!about which you were notified on this page in November 2021.
 * 24-hr BRD cycle: If a change you make to this article is reverted, you may not reinstate that change unless you discuss the issue on the talk page and wait 24 hours (from the time of the original edit). Partial reverts/reinstatements that reasonably address objections of other editors are preferable to wholesale reverts.

Your sequence of edits:  without engagement on the talk page violated this restriction. Please self-revert your second edit and, if you wish, seek consensus for your proposed change on the article talk page. SPECIFICO talk 18:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Viktory02, I see that you have made several edits today without taking care of the above by undoing the second edit above. If you intend to do so, please take care of that promptly and let's both get on to other things. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 23:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * SPECIFICO A third edit would qualify as edit warring (at least imo). This is not the proper method for conflict resolution and I owe you no debt. To the matter at hand, I should have originally left a edit summary but I did and no objections were raised to that but rather this. I personally feel like this is merely an intimidation method on reasonable edits that if you take issue with should be addressed differently. This in my view does not comply with Civility policies. I hope this is received well. Viktory02 (talk) 23:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I copied the page restriction above so that you could readily confirm the violation. Please review it and undo the second edit linked above. Otherwise I will report the matter for enforcement, per the text copied above. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 00:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

You've re-inserted your change at this diff without going to the article talk page as required by the page restriction. This is now the third time I will advise you to read that restriction, per the text I copied above that you can verify on the article talk page. Please self-revert your reinsertion and go to the talk page if you think you can get consensus for this change to the article content. Changes to the opening of the lead are among the most likely to be challenged and elicit a variety of editor opinions. If you feel that you do not understand the restriction you can consult the Admin who devised it, or any other Admin. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 18:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC) The Admin who devised this restriction -- which is not the same as 1RR -- is . SPECIFICO talk 18:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

24 hours were waited. Viktory02 (talk) 18:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * As I just reiterated to you immediately above, the restriction is not only 24 hours -- it is also to go to the talk page to collaborate with other editors on your proposal. Please self revert. I'm not going to repeat myself on this page and will proceed to enforcement, per the instructions copied above, Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 19:58, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * If you're interested in another opinion, you're definitely committing a WP:SYNTH violation with that edit. You need a source that explicitly links her leaving with an abusive environment. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ScottishFinnishRadish I appreciate your cordial tone. I went ahead and re-read the policy you cited (WP:SYNTH) to double-check and this is not a violation of that policy. Multiple sources have synthesized this information, not I. I went ahead and did a quick web search and quickly found five different news sources who reached that conclusion. My opinion or pov does not matter merely what reliable sources say and that is what I wrote onto the page. While this whole conversation has been nice, discussions about article content should take place on the article talk pages. Thanks Viktory02 (talk) 22:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

SPI
I have mentioned you here. SPECIFICO talk 00:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts&#32;per the evidence presented at Sockpuppet investigations/Viktory02. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)