This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I recently 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 will learn and change from this experience and block. Regards, Willbb23418:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
This appeal falls well short of convincing me that you understand how serious your comment was: sexual harassment which you characterized as "just a joke" ([1]) and then repeated the comment as you invited a reviewing administrator to "stop taking stuff so literally" ([2]). I'm going to post some external resources below about the harms of passing off sexual harassment as "just a joke", which I suggest you read and deeply reflect on before you consider another unblock appeal. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
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)[reply]
As I mentioned, here are some resources on online harassment which you may be interested in reviewing.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Along with the things I said in my previous unblock request, I would also like to acknowledge the seriousness of my comment and the fact that I have read through the resources given and have given thought to what they have said. Passing off sexual harassment as a joke is completely inappropriate. I hope that we can move on. Willbb23417:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
This has been open nearly two months with no admins seeing fit to unblock, although several have commented on the page. There is no consensus to unblock, though the discussion was not well attended. If you would like to compose an appeal to the community, please create a new request. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Admin side discussion about procedure
Possible block evasion as Jameli0. 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)[reply]
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. Willbb23417:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@Ivanvector: 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, Willbb23423:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)"[reply]
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
"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, Willbb23409:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)"[reply]
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
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, Willbb23422:12, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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. StarMississippi02:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
However it wasn’t unrelated - they actually violated the site wide 1-RR against them here in the in incident with @Fruitloop11 - [3] - 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the April 2024 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2023 coordinator election, Zippybonzo stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki and Miniapolis were reelected coordinators, and Wracking was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).
Drive: 46 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 32 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 289 articles totaling 626,729 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: 23 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 18 claimed at least one copy-edit and between them, they copy-edited 100,293 words in 32 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 53 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive, 34 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 300 articles totaling 587,828 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 14 to 20 April. Barnstars will be awarded here.
Progress report: As of 23:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 109 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,480 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C
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.
Hello and welcome to the June 2024 newsletter, a quarterly-ish digest of Guild activities since April. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Wanted: new Guild coordinators! If you value and enjoy the GOCE, why not help out behind the scenes? Nominations for our mid-year coordinator election are now open until 23:59 on 15 June (UTC). Self-nominations are welcome. Voting commences at 00:01 on 16 June and continues until 23:50 on 30 June. Results will be announced at the election page.
Blitz: Nine of the fourteen editors who signed up for the April 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 55,853 words comprising twenty articles. Barnstars awarded are available here.
Drive: 58 editors signed up for our May 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive and 33 of those completed at least one copy edit. 251 articles and 475,952 words were copy edited. Barnstars awarded are here.
Progress report: As of 05:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC) , GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 2,779 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed Mox Eden to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as Lead Coordinator, and Miniapolis and Wracking returned as assistant coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.
Blitz: 13 of the 24 editors who signed up for the June 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 169,404 words comprising 41 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 38 of the 59 editors who signed up for the July 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 482,133 words comprising 293 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: 10 of the 15 editors who signed up for the August 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 71,294 words comprising 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive:Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.
Progress report: As of 05:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 233 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,824 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you no longer want this newsletter, you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist.
Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor to be a Guild coordinator (with their permission, of course) until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June.
Drive: In our September Backlog Elimination Drive, 67 editors signed up, 39 completed at least one copy edit, and between them they edited 682,696 words comprising 507 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: The October Copy Editing Blitz saw 16 editors sign-up, 15 of whom completed at least one copy edit. They edited 76,776 words comprising 35 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: In our November Backlog Elimination Drive, 432,320 words in 151 articles were copy edited. Of the 54 users who signed up, 33 copy edited at least one article. Barnstars awarded are posted here.
Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 15 December (UTC) and will end on 21 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 333 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,401 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.
To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
