User talk:Alison Alice
Alison Alice (talk) 21:52, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Alison Alice, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Longhair\talk 22:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Old account
[edit]Would you please let me know the name of your old account? You can email me if you wish. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 06:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Alison, if you do have an old account I suggest you find an option that doesn't include disclosing it to Doug Weller who may be coordinating off site with EvergreenFir to ban you.[1] I would definitely not expose my email address or any other personally identifiable information considering the increased harassment faced by women here especially the recent case of one woman tracked down by a high ranking editor who phoned her at her work, from the looks of it, to intimidate her.[2]. Stay safe and good luck.
103.208.220.136 (talk) 08:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Ah that's a bit worrisome thank you for the heads up! I've had harrassment issues before. It might not matter though as I don't really remember what my past account was. It was a long time ago, and I haven't been on here (except as a reader!) since. Alison Alice (talk) 02:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- The community trusted me enough to elect me twice to the WP:Arbitration Committee. I'm an appropriate person to ask this. The. Committee keeps the names of legitimate former or alternate accounts confidential. Doug Weller talk 21:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- I haven't been on here in years so I don't remember exactly! Was more a desperate plea that maybe someone from back then would notice me or remember, as some of my bio hasn't changed since. It had my name and initial in it but I don't remember exactly...AlisonAA maybe? I'm sorry I don't exactly recall. I can take it out of my user page I guess :( Alison Alice (talk) 02:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- No, now it's there, best to leave it there. The IP has misrepresented what happened. An experienced editor who really dislikes undisclosed paid editing unwisely contacted a new editor by phone, finding their phone number through information left in an edit summary. This was discovered and long story short the editor has left Wikipedia, realising that they had gone too far and facing a possible block or ban. The paid editor happened to be a woman. There was no attempt to harass, although there was an attempt to stop undisclosed paid editing. Doug Weller talk 17:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation
[edit]You have been mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/ModerateMikayla555#Comments_by_other_users Snooganssnoogans (talk) Sorry I'm still somewhat new. Can you explain what this means?
July 2019
[edit]
Your recent editing history at Center for Immigration Studies shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please stop trying to disruptively add content or remove content that has been decided by consensus. This is not a good way to prove you aren’t a sock. Toa Nidhiki05 21:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions alerts, please read
[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Doug Weller talk 12:40, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
July 2019
[edit]
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Jorm. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
He accused me of being a sock and a white supremacist lmao, fuck off
A sockpuppet investigation has been created about you. Toa Nidhiki05 01:26, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- If I disagree with you it must be bc I'm a sock!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alison Alice (talk • contribs)
July 2019
[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.