User talk:Magioladitis

„,Woran arbeiten Sie?‘, wurde Herr K. gefragt. Herr K. antwortete: ,Ich habe viel Mühe, ich bereite meinen nächsten Irrtum vor.“

If you are interested in attending Wikimedia webinars please contact me via Wikipedia email

Corfupedia school project

ANI discussion closure

Resolved

I have closed the ANI discussion concerning your high speed editing. There were two basic proposals made concerning sanctions against your account, the first was to block you for a number of days. I found this proposal did not have consensus and therefore did not 'pass' whilst the second was to ban you from using AWB, semi-automated and automated tools. I found that there was consensus for this to 'pass'. The ban against you using AWB had several different options, mainly a one month ban, a three month ban and an indefinite ban, and for it to apply just to your main account or to all of your accounts. I've created a compromise approach which is for the ban to apply to your main account (i.e this one) and to last for two months at which point you may appeal for the ban to be lifted (with the presumption it be lifted if the community cannot agree to extend it).

I have also asked that any breach of this ban be reported to the Arbitration Committee rather than ANI.

-- Nick (talk) 11:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Nick This means I am allowed to use my bot account for AWB editing. Thanks for not falling to the blocking proposal nonsense. Magioladitis (talk) 19:59, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, AWB is allowed on your bot account but not this (the Magioladitis (talk · contribs)) account. Nick (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Nick Perfect. I haven't used AWB already for a week. So, it's till August 31 that I will stay out of AWB editing from my main account. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Magioladitis, the topic ban very clearly says "Magioladitis can appeal to the community for his AWB ban to be removed on or after 7 September, so giving a firm 2 month ban and leaving the community with the option to lift the ban or continue it as they see fit after that time." The ban is for two months as of today, at the very least, and constitutes a lesser alternative to the 3 month ban most people supported. Trying to Wikilawyer for August 31 on the day of the ban will only further convince the community that it was a bad idea to only give you a 2-month ban, and will not gain you any friends once you try to appeal the ban. Declaring your intent to resume editing with AWB after 2 months (counted however) is also unwise, as the community will decide if you can resume such editing.

See also WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Headbomb The text above says nothing about September 7. I thought the text above was/is an exact copy of the final decision. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

There are two closure notices, maybe you missed the second one. 7 September is specifically mentioned here. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:06, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

That wasn't the closure I made. The compromise I made when closing the discussion was that you would be banned from using AWB with your main account (and then clarified to include any other account of yours, new or existing which lacks a bot flag) until 7 September 2017, at which point you would need to ask the community if it was OK to resume use of AWB on your main account (this account) or any other account you 'own' - given discussions run for a week, you could start a discussion on 1 September but you must not resume the use of AWB until the community has had a change to discuss whether or not to retain the ban (and if there's no consensus to retain the ban, the assumption would be the ban would lapse). Nick (talk) 21:07, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Headbomb I can stay the on extra week awat from AWB editing. I hope my bot will do the task anyway and there will no more stalling on the BAG part. There was a decision to re-examine all my bot's tasks and the procedure is super slow at the moment.-- Magioladitis (talk) 21:07, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Nick Thanks for the second notice. I plan to resume my work on September 2 so I'll ask community earlier to ensure nobody disagrees. The spirit of the ban has been followed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:01, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I would caution you not to use your bot account to circumvent these sanctions as you'd threatened to do so here. SQL^{Query me!} 09:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

SQL This is a bot task. It can be done in Auto mode or manual mode. Where is the problem exactly? I can manually review every edit. How is is againsy anythng? The BRFA gives options: "Automatic, Supervised, or Manual". One is to run manually from the bot account. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:56, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Request

dear admin,

user Richard.eames is consistently deleting referenced content from the following Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Anti-Corruption_Academy

kindly note he works for the organization.

i request the page so be locked by admins and only allow edits after review by the volunteer community.

thank you

Next gender gap meeting

Corfu: Monday, July 10 at the Central Public Library. See you there! -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Reference: [1]. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Gender gap Workshop in Corfu. Organised by Marios Magioladitis in the frame of "Why Women Don't Edit Wikipedia?"

Gender gap workshop in Corfu. Organised by Marios Magioladitis in the frame of "Why Women Don't Edit Wikipedia?"

Gender gap workshop in Corfu. Organised by Marios Magioladitis in the frame of "Why Women Don't Edit Wikipedia?

Violation of your topic ban

Your topic ban specifically restricts you from participating in discussions about the amendment and impact of the COSMETICBOT policy. So you have no place taking part in a discussion on the talk page of that policy about how it related to fixing HTML errors. Your "justification" that those edits might not be considered cosmetic in the future shows a clear lack of understanding about what this topic ban is about. You are banned from discussing which edits should or should not be considered to be covered by COSMETICBOT, i.e. it is irrelevant whether the edits actually are cosmetic, as long as the discussion at hand is about that distinction. Consider this a formal warning in my capacity as an administrator, if you continue to take part in such discussions I will have to block you in order to enforce the ban. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 18:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Kingpin Where is the discussion? I did not participate in any discusion of changing any policy. I think you are confused. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Kingpin Still trying to figure out which edit you meant and since you have not replied yet I ll presume that you meant my comment on TIDY. What I meant is that soon the tags will be broken and the pages will be broken so there will be changes to the visual outcome of the page. Did you mean that?. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Of course I'm referring to your comments in this discussion thread Wikipedia talk:Bot_policy#TIDY, and no I am not "confused". You're not doing yourself any favours here. Yes, that discussion is specifically about the COSMETICBOT policy, the thread was initiated to discuss this change to the policy and how the removal of TIDY would impact that section of the bot policy (hence the discussion being on the talkpage of BOTPOL). You immediately replied (i.e. participating in the discussion). The second section specifically was started to discuss (in the words of the section opener) "is this change cosmetic" - i.e. what types of edit the policy should cover. Again, you responded immediately (again participating in the discussion, in direct violation of your ban). Nobody can deny that the discussion is about the bot policy (it's on WT:BOTPOL) and you can't deny that the specific section it is about is COSMETICBOT, nor can you deny that you have participated in that discussion, consider this your very final warning, and that will include further re-wordings of the comments that you have already left at the page (such as this edit in which apparently you try to conceal the fact that you and I both clearly know - you are discussing the COSMETICBOT policy in this section). Regards, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)