This page contains some of the the lessons I have learnt on wikipedia. I hope others take time to review these:
This page contains some of the the lessons I have learnt on wikipedia. I hope others take time to review these:
| Some related links |
|---|
| Josh da man's edits |
| My edits |
| Chingyhayden's page |
| Chingyhayden's user page history |
| There may be other links |
|- This was the first time I was ever blocked, and hopefully the only. If it wasn't for Yksin's help, I would've still be blocked indef..
Sockpuppetry caseYou have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Deco Da Man for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. – N96 02:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC) {{unblock-auto|1=58.84.200.3|2=Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Josh da man". The reason given for Josh da man's block is: "Vandalism-only account".|3=Ryan Postlethwaite|4=539702}}
My Appeal
To block review admins: I'm the established editor Alison is referring to. Please also note my comments on this case above (between the block info and Deco Da Man's appeal) which I had written last night in support of Deco Da Man, but which he moved for his own archival purposes I guess. Thanks. --Yksin 15:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC) Update: I've moved my comments from last night back down below so it's easier not to miss them because they follow in a more logical order; my comments when I wrote them originally were right under Deco's explanation under "My appeal" above -- & have also changed subheader levels. --Yksin 15:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC) My Appeal TalkComment to admins from a bystander: I have only "known" Deco Da Man for a couple of days based on a problematic edit he made to an article I've done a lot of work on (see my message to him above about being careful about placing speedy delete tags, & his reply to me on my talk page. I did quite a bit of research on Deco Da Man's edit history before I wrote to him, & I found no reason to disbelieve any of his presentations of himself: he is a 13 year old kid from Australia who is a relative newbie to Wikipedia, has acquainted himself more with fiddling around with his own user pages than with edits out in the big wide realm of Wikipedia & does not seem well-acquainted with Wikipedia policies (which frankly, Deco Da Man, I think you might want to pay some attention to), but at the same time is good-willed & willing to learn from his mistakes. You also might note that his presentations of himself on his main user page were backed up by other information out on the net. For example, a Google search on his real name or on his nom de guerre of Deco Da Man will turn up pages that back up his claims. This is basically a smart kid who probably knows more about computers than I do, even though I work with them all day, but is perhaps a bit lazy about learning about policies & proper deletion prodding, etc. I was suprised to find him accused of sockpuppetry. On looking at the edits between him, Josh Da Man, & Chingyhayden -- even before reading his explanation above -- I theorized exactly what he claims to have happened: kids engaging in typical kid behavior that in fact was of no harm to anyone. This looks to me rather like a case of forgetting the principle of "be kind to newbies", assume good faith, etc., and seems a case rather of overreaction to simple kid exploration of this community. Again, no harm was done, & there certainly were very few edits to result in such a consequence as indefinite blocking. So basically... I guess you could say I'm an adult (47) editor who has lived with a 13-year old kid, & I'm speaking up to ask you to give this one a break. Regards. --Yksin 08:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
|
This is the second time I was blcoked. And I did nothing at all to provoke this.
var urlrequest:URLRequest = new URLRequest("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=recentchanges&format=xml&rclimit=10");
var urlloader:URLLoader = new URLLoader();
urlloader.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, updateChanges);
var recentChanges:Array = new Array();
function updateChanges(e:Event) {
var xml:XMLDocument = new XMLDocument(e.target.data);
for each(var xmlchild in xml.childNodes[0].childNodes[1].childNodes[0].childNodes) {
var changed = true;
for(var i=0;i<recentChanges.length;i++) {
if (xmlchild.attributes.title == recentChanges[i].title && xmlchild.attributes.timestamp == recentChanges[i].timestamp) {
changed = false;
}
}
if (changed) {
recentChanges.push({title:xmlchild.attributes.title, timestamp:xmlchild.attributes.timestamp});
if (recentChanges.length>50) {
for (var i=0;i<recentChanges.length-50;i++) {
recentChanges.shift();
}
}
}
}
main_text_box.text = "";
for (var i = recentChanges.length-1;i>0;i--) {
main_text_box.htmlText += i+" "+recentChanges[i].timestamp+" <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/"+recentChanges[i].title+"'>"+recentChanges[i].title+"</a><br>";
}
getChanges();
}
function progressEvent(e:ProgressEvent) {
var progPercent = e.target.bytesLoaded/e.target.bytesTotal;
trace("Loaded: "+(progPercent*100));
}
function getChanges() {
urlloader.load(urlrequest);
}
getChanges();Good grief! Another example, from the same admin (User:Ryulong, of taking the book & not just throwing it but absolutely squashing the perceived offender under it. Given the few edits involved, this sanction is so out of proportion as to beggar the imagination.
Of the edits Deco Da Man has done since his initial (& I would argue unjust block from the same admin) was lifted, the only ones I could find that look like "social networking" edits are those improving the design (at Wpktsf's invitation) to User:Wpktsfs/poetry, on User talk:Wpktsfs about those edits, him signing User:Chetblong/Super Secret Page, and a couple of notes to User:Selfworm about "super secret pages" and guestbooks set up by Selfworm. Interestingly enough, Deco Da Man's edits were only in response to stuff set up by those other users; interestingly enough, none of those other users got warnings (or blocks) about behavior that might be considered to amount to "social networking." His other edits since the prior block ended have been to thank me for standing up for him, archiving the conversation surrounding the prior block, welcoming a new user on that user's talk page (User talk:Iw newc84, and contributing to Talk:ActionScript/rewrite.
Otherwise, Deco Da Man seems to have taken to heart my advice after the last block to learn the rules & keep his nose clean before making edits... & what does he get for taking but further punishment from an admin who, pardon me, seems to have a particular animosity towards him. Or at least that's the only explanation I can summon up for not just one but two blocks made by the same admin based on very few edits, without any warnings given in advance per the usual Wikipedia practice of WP:Assume good faith and (Deco Man is right to point out) Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers. I certainly hope whichever admin reviews this block is more fair in their evaluation of Deco Da Man's activities, particularly in light of his age (13), inexperience, & relative newness to Wikipedia. Be sure to also review the history of the prior block that Deco Da Man has archived. --Yksin 17:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
A more formal proposal
I think what I'm offering is something like this: Wikipedia:Mentorship or Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User, with me acting as mentor/adopter to Deco Da Man. I notice that I satisfy all the criteria for an adopter under the AAU program. Would this be acceptable to you, Ryulong? Alison? Would you be able to work with this, Deco Da Man? --Yksin 22:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Deco Da Man. In hopes that your second (& in my eyes, second unjust) blocking case is resolved favorably, there are nonetheless some issues that another admin (Alison) besides the blocking editor (Ryulong)) believes need to be addressed: appropriate use of your own userspace, & making contributions by edits to Wikipedia mainspace (i.e., articles). So, here's some suggestions:
Appropriate use of your own userspace.
First take a look at policies and guidelines: WP:NOT#SOCIALNET and Wikipedia:User page
Based on my memory of what your userpage looked like before it was deleted, I'd guess that you from Ryulong's POV it was providing more autobiographical detail about yourself than necessary for Wikipedia purposes, while giving very little about what your interests are on Wikipedia. Take a look at my user page, for example. Or here are other examples I'm just randomly grabbing to show how various users inform the community of their Wikipedia-specific activities/interests: Gimmetrow, Pb30, Keenan Pepper. Note how this last one provide some autobiographical info, but also mentions specific interests & includes a to-do list of tasks that particular users wants to accomplish. You might consider using Template:Todo, which is a nice gizmo way to do the same thing.
All those pages focus more on what how the users involve themselves in Wikipedia than in their non-WP lives/histories: the info, to quote from above, is "providing a foundation for effective collaboration."
Making contributions in Wikipedia mainspace
Maybe you don't know where to begin...? Some start-up resources
Anyway, I hope this block, too, is resolved in your favor, & there's a few suggestions to help you keep it off you. Please do ask for help if you don't know what to do. I've got your talk page on my watchlist -- so even if you can't write on mine because of a block, I'm keeping an eye out. --Yksin 22:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.