User talk:Willbb234

The Bugle: Issue 213, January 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Unblock request
Do you understand that when all we have is text on a screen, we have little option but to take you literally? The other point I would ask you to be aware of is that Wikipedia is a global community and what you might find humorous won't necessarily be found so by others- and that not everyone wants to read such comments. This is a public space, not a bar. 331dot (talk) 18:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned, here are some resources on online harassment which you may be interested in reviewing.
 * The Inclusion Solution, "Unpacking the Conversations that Matter: “It’s just a joke! Why are you so upset?”"
 * Inside Higher Ed, "The Just Joking Defense"
 * Medium, "Don’t Take It So Seriously, It’s Just A Joke — Or Is It?"
 * The Conversation, "‘It’s just a joke’: the subtle effects of offensive language"
 * The Guardian, "Can't you take a joke, love? Why the 'banter' isn't funny any more"
 * risk(within)reason, "“It was just a joke!” How bullies blame their victims"

And here are some lesson guides which, despite being designed to introduce these concepts to children, you may nonetheless find informative:
 * Childnet, "Just a joke?"
 * MediaSmarts.ca, "Just a joke? Helping youth respond to casual prejudice"

-- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:25, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 214, February 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Unblock request for community review
block evasion as. At the very least, I think Willbb234 should account for why that specific account regularly shows up on the same IP address as this one. --Yamla (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * This is the first I have heard of this. I live in shared accomodation. Willbb234 23:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Meh. No overlap. &#45;-  Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * what say ye? &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi it's been quite a while since this was last looked at. Can I be unblocked? Willbb234 16:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The CU overlap looks inconsequential to me. Given the nature of the offense I think this block would be best reviewed by the community. Would you like to draft an appeal statement to be copied over? (courtesy ping, , , ) Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Meh. Too early for a standard offer, but maybe. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Three people have already looked at this unblock (probably more who haven't commented). If you want to take it to the community then you can copy and paste over my comments from the two unblock requests. Willbb234 17:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Well to be clear this is not a WP:SO situation, it's just a feeling I have that the nature of the infraction is one where the community should approve before unblocking, and I think the (at least four) other admins who have reviewed this but not taken any action (neither approving nor declining) is further indication of that. But maybe going this way just brings more light to a regrettable incident that's in the past? Now I'm not sure, what do the other admins here think? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty meh here. There's no way I'd unblock a user who made a comment like that, but I'm not opposed to any admin lifting the block or especially to the community deciding this user is worth a second chance. For the record, Ivanvector believes the CU overlap is inconsequential. I haven't looked again, but have no reason to believe Ivan is mistaken. On that basis, I think we all agree there's no evidence of block evasion. --Yamla (talk) 18:47, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Meh indeed. On the one side we have contrition. On the other, a single WP:Zero tolerance mistake. So, like Yamla, I won't oppose unblock, but won't unblock on my own. So, yeah. A second chance would be better put forth by the Community. Do we agree what we have as an unblock request so far would be sufficient to sway the Community? No point in going to the well with a leaky bucket. &#45;-  Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I think it's a plausible request for the community to consider. What specifically counts in favour is Willbb234 read through the material provided by Ivanvector. Hard to predict which way the community will go in a case like this, though. --Yamla (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It's a little threadbare, but I think acceptable given the background. Editors are likely to challenge Willbb234's understanding of the links I provided earlier, so it'll come out if they really didn't look at them. In fact, since it's likely that they'll need to respond to questions, why don't I post at AN about a review happening on this page, instead of our usual method of copying comments from here to there? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Works for me. --Yamla (talk) 19:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Right, then that's what I'll do. I'm going to roll up this inside baseball stuff though. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Excellent &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)


 * As one of our mandatory ritual formalities, Willbb234, I'm required to notify you that I have mentioned you in a thread at WP:AN, titled Unblock request: Willbb234. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * That's been over a week since this was opened and the last comment was several days ago. Do you think a decision could be made? Thanks, Willbb234 23:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Well that didn't go how I expected. There is no consensus to unblock owing to very limited participation. I'm going to close the appeal as unsuccessful, but if you want to you can post another appeal to be copied over to AN to be handled the usual way. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
 * please copy the following to an AN appeal:


 * "In December I made a nasty comment and I would like to apologise for said comment and for the distress it caused. I would also like to apologise to those that had to read the comment. I promise that this won't happen again. In my nearly five years of editing this is what I believe to be the first personal attack I have made, and so it is certainly not like me to make such a comment, and I have learned and changed from this block. I would also like to acknowledge the seriousness of my comment and the fact that I have read through the resources given on my talk page and have given thought to what they have said. Passing off sexual harassment as a joke is completely inappropriate.


 * There was a lack of consensus for unblocking in the community discussion on my talk page, which comes down to the fact that two of the users participating there had previously had disagreements with me. I think a community AN discussion would allow for wider participation hopefully from users who can view the situation with an unbiased perspective. Thank you, Willbb234 23:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)"


 * I have done so, please see Administrators' noticeboard. This post is intended to serve as the required notice that you're mentioned in a thread at AN, obviously. I will do my best to cross-post any responses you want to make here to comments made there, but I also have poor availability for the next few days. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, please can an admin copy the following to a reply under Abecedare's reply at Administrators' noticeboard:

"I think that it is unfair to say that I have made "numerous other personal attacks" in the last five years without evidencing this. As I say In my nearly five years of editing this is what I believe to be the first personal attack I have made and I still stand by this statement. I have been uncivil in the past, and that is something I have 'served my time' for and I have deliberately made an effort to be more collaborative and polite as of late (the four links that you give are all from over a year ago). Regards, Willbb234 09:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)"
 * ✅.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

please can an admin close the my unblock request at WP:AN. I don't feel like this is heading towards a consensus to unblock and I would rather appeal at a later date hopefully when the community is more confident that an unblock would be appropriate. Thank you and goodbye, Willbb234 22:12, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Community discussion
Per above, I have invited editors who would normally comment on an unblock request at WP:AN to comment here instead. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC)


 * While they were blocked due to the violation of WP:NPA, I think the bigger question that still stays is whether their general repeated history of edit warring is going to change as it was not addressed in any of the unblock requests.
 * It appears there is a year(s) long history of this and even a WP:1RR restriction that was placed on them in May 2023 with a possible appeal after 6 months, which would have been October, but they were blocked for WP:3RR in October 2023 when that 1-RR restriction would have been in place still, it doesn't look like it was ever appealed, so the subsequent edit warring in September 2023, another in October 2023 (for which they were blocked after I submitted it at the 3RR noticeboard), as well as in December 2023 just show a long history of disregard for these rules, so while they have at times been editing constructively, they also cause a lot of effort arguing and WP:WIKILAWYERING if content is against their views with users and in each of these edit wars and the side discussions that have been brought to ANI such as this one from October.
 * So while they apologized for the personal attack, I don't see how their behavior of edit warring is going to cease, given that they violated the 1-RR multiple times after May (and editors, myself including) weren't even aware that they are under a sitewide 1-RR restriction. So this general disruptive behavior just feels like it runs afoul of WP:NOTHERE and I think that would have to be addressed prior to an unblock. Raladic (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Meh does an adult really need sanctions to know that comment was inappropriate to say here? I wouldn't unblock but like my fellow admins above, I wouldn't oppose someone else doing it. Like Raladic, while the comment was gross, I feel like edit warring is the more long term issue. Star   Mississippi  02:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I think this block has served its purpose and they've got the message, and see no reason not to unblock. It's wrong to oppose unblock on the basis of issues that are completely unrelated to the original reasons for the block, like the edit warring issues here. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * However it wasn’t unrelated - they actually violated the site wide 1-RR against them here in the in incident with @Fruitloop11 - - this was their second revert in this and only for the fact that no one was aware of them being under a 1-RR restriction did Fruitloop11 only issue a warning after that second revert, warning them of our general 3-RR rule and then subsequently being insulted by Willbb234.
 * So only for the fact that the block for violating NPA pre-empted the block for violating the 1RR they violated, but given that they violated the 1-RR to begin with repeatedly, since they also did so in October, I’d argue it very much is relevant. Raladic (talk) 01:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It's unrelated in the sense that had they not done other things they would not have been blocked solely due to edit warring but if they had not edit warred they still would have been blocked for the other things. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Is this where we recommend a probation period? There's little evidence that this user is productive, and a lot that they are hotheaded to a fault. If we say they've learnt from this (awful, gross) incident and everyone gets a second chance, would it be unreasonable to say they need to 'prove' it was worth giving them that second chance? A year-long probation of 'any violation is an auto-block', and back to previous restrictions after that. or something?
 * Though based on the context of this incident, while they may have needed the prodding to learn that their specific comment was inappropriate and apologised, I don't know if we have seen them acknowledge the other issue it shows: that, in a regular pattern of behaviour, they are unwilling or unable to actually discuss anything at all. (I.e. they made that comment in response to a warning, rather than discuss the edit.) It's vital to collaborative editing, and I'd like to see an acknowledgement that their tendency to edit war or insult their way out of disputes is inappropriate, and some kind of pledge that they will make an effort to reach out and discuss first in future if they even think about either. Kingsif (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 215, March 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 216, April 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 217, May 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 218, June 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 219, July 2024
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)