User talk:Igny: Difference between revisions
Paul Siebert (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
::Miacek? Who is Miacek?--[[User:Paul Siebert|Paul Siebert]] ([[User talk:Paul Siebert|talk]]) 00:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC) |
::Miacek? Who is Miacek?--[[User:Paul Siebert|Paul Siebert]] ([[User talk:Paul Siebert|talk]]) 00:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::[[User:Miacek]] was one of [[WP:EEML#Involved parties]]. At that time it was highly surprising because he was known for his integrity in many WP aspects. That is also why I found it rather surprising for him to get involved here... ([[User:Igny|Igny]] ([[User talk:Igny#top|talk]]) 00:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)) |
:::[[User:Miacek]] was one of [[WP:EEML#Involved parties]]. At that time it was highly surprising because he was known for his integrity in many WP aspects. That is also why I found it rather surprising for him to get involved here... ([[User:Igny|Igny]] ([[User talk:Igny#top|talk]]) 00:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)) |
||
::::Aha, I thought he was some new uninvolved user. I suggest you to behave as cautious and as cool as possible. In my opinion, jumping into this swamp right after the end of your topic ban was a mistake. --[[User:Paul Siebert|Paul Siebert]] ([[User talk:Paul Siebert|talk]]) 00:20, 18 June 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:20, 18 June 2012
Igny is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia in a few weeks |
Arbitration requests for amendment
Hello, I have mentioned you in a requests for amendment at Arbitration, you can find the discussion here. Thank you. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 05:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: Request for participation
Dear Igny: Hello. This is just to let you know that you've been mentioned in the following request at the Mediation Cabal, which is a Wikipedia dispute resolution initiative that resolves disputes by informal mediation.
The request can be found at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/02 October 2011/Holodomor.
Just so you know, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate. If you wish to do so, and we'll see what we can do about getting this sorted out. At MedCab we aim to help all involved parties reach a solution and hope you will join in this effort.
If you have any questions relating to this or any other issue needing mediation, you can ask on the case talk page, the MedCab talk page, or you can ask the mediator, Steven Zhang, at their talk page.
MedcabBot (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Modification of topic ban
Hi Igny, your DIGWUREN topic ban has been amended to allow you to participate in the above mediation case. The conditions of the modification are set out here. Please let me know if you have any questions. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Holodomor mediation spokespersons
Hello Igny, this is Mr. Stradivarius from the Holodomor Medcab mediation. The mediation has been going slowly recently, and as you might have seen from the mediation page, we have been talking about appointing spokespersons for each other to get things moving along. The other mediators and I have decided that it's best to impose a deadline for deciding spokespersons, otherwise it really doesn't look like this mediation is going to progress. So, we would like you to authorize another editor who you trust to be a spokesperson for your viewpoint, by 12am, December 1st, 2011 (UTC). If you do not decide a spokesperson by this time, then we will proceed with the mediation even if you provide no input. You can find more details on our ideas for spokespersons and on what has been discussed so far at the spokespersons section on the mediation page. Thank you again for your cooperation. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 11:02, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Also, here's User:Steven Zhang's outline of how the spokesperson system will work, for your reference:
Basically how this works, two, three or four editors are appointed by the rest of the editors as spokespersons for their collective viewpoints. This spokesperson should be the only one who presents the views of the collective people he/she represents. I'm going to ask each of you to consider nominating a spokesperson, or who you would like to represent your viewpoints, and if you do not wish to do this, to provide an explanation and a commitment to remain active throughout the mediation case. We're still on the first issue and need to crank things up a gear.
So please leave your username and who you would like to nominate as your spokesperson here; or if you do not wish to nominate a spokesperson, please leave a commitment that you will remain active throughout the rest of the Holodomor mediation. Thanks again. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 12:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- This is a note to let you know that the deadline for deciding spokespersons has passed, and that we will be progressing with the mediation without your input. You are, of course, free to comment or to nominate a spokesperson at any time. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 11:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: Case update
Dear Igny: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:
is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, Steven Zhang, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 12:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Holodomor mediation issue two
Hi Igny, this is a boilerplate message to let you know that we have moved on to issue two of the Holodomor mediation, victim estimates. At the moment we are accepting statements from all participants, so if you want to make your position on this issue known, then now would be a very good time to contribute. Your statement should be no longer than 200 words, and should include both your opinion on the issue and what you hope will be addressed in the mediation. We will be accepting statements until 00:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC), or until we have statements from all spokespersons. Please note, however, that even if you miss this deadline you are free to contribute to the mediation at any time. You can find the appropriate section on the mediation page here. All the best — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 06:47, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: Case update
Dear Igny: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:
is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, Steven Zhang, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 06:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: Case update
Dear Igny: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:
is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, Steven Zhang, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: Case update
Dear Igny: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:
is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, Steven Zhang, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 12:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Dispute resolution survey
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Igny. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hi - thanks for your visualisation for this article - if its ok I added it to the article. Thank you and well done! =) F = q(E+v×B) ⇄ ∑ici 12:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Warning
Please note that edit warring does not require a 3RR "bright line infraction". Please self-revert your reinsertion of the "pov tag" ay yhe Baltic occupation article. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:35, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Igny, please, do not revert Estlandia's revert. In this situation one must stay cool.--Paul Siebert (talk) 20:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- You would think that Miacek would know better than do WP:NINJA reverts for his buddies... (Igny (talk) 23:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC))
- Miacek? Who is Miacek?--Paul Siebert (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- User:Miacek was one of WP:EEML#Involved parties. At that time it was highly surprising because he was known for his integrity in many WP aspects. That is also why I found it rather surprising for him to get involved here... (Igny (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC))
- Aha, I thought he was some new uninvolved user. I suggest you to behave as cautious and as cool as possible. In my opinion, jumping into this swamp right after the end of your topic ban was a mistake. --Paul Siebert (talk) 00:20, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- User:Miacek was one of WP:EEML#Involved parties. At that time it was highly surprising because he was known for his integrity in many WP aspects. That is also why I found it rather surprising for him to get involved here... (Igny (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC))
- Miacek? Who is Miacek?--Paul Siebert (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)