User talk:Sydney Bluegum

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Sydney Bluegum! I am fetchcomms and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Â fetchcommsâ�� 03:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RfM on Tree shaping->Arborsculpture

Hello. You may want to ring in on the RfM survey at Tree shaping->Arborsculpture RfM at some point during the next seven days. Blackash have a chat 12:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Griseum/Reames

There were 6 editors who outed themselves as two (208.91.143.205 / Reames / Slowart ) and (208.59.93.238 / 96.233.40.199 / Griseum ) Then Richard Reames accidentally signed Griseum on my talk page, it was only for 4 seconds before he removed it, here. Hi Richard Reames

I did point this out to SilkTork here. innocent word

SilkTork also pointed out the IP address being across the country from each other, so I went to google to search IP address and come across sites that will hide your IP addess for you. Here my search link Look at google suggestions of related links at the bottom of the page and there is hide Ip address search link It doesn't seem to be hard to hide the Ip address, some sites suggests doing so to get access to other country's Free TV shows. SilkTork basically said don't bother, focus on the edits not the editors. After reading about WP:sock puppets I can understand why SilkTork said that. Blackash have a chat 11:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your interest

Sydney Bluegum, No worries. I'm back to assuming good faith WP:AGF with you. Basically we all just need to remember this is not a forum for discussion, this is a opportunity to cooperatively build a good encyclopedic article using verifiable and reliable sources.WP:RELIABLE Slowart (talk) 17:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Single purpose accounts

You are correct, Sydney Bluegum, you do not have to explain anything, but obviously the nature of your account is clear to other working editors, and differs significantly from those of participating editors who are WP:Here to build an encyclopedia, because it is a WP:Single purpose account (i.e. you appear to come to wikipedia to comment on this page and in general, to advocate for Blackash). That's not editing, and will be understood properly in that context, when it comes time to establish consensus (or lack thereof) among participating neutral editors who are here to build an encyclopedia, about changes that merit consensus. Please do not take offense at that, or take it as a personal attack at all. It is according to Wikipedia policy on neutrality (which you can read essays about at those two WP: links) and is the reality of the situation as presented by your readily accessible contributions history. If you want to be taken with more weight by other experienced editors, edit more articles, gain some experience, and establish a reputation as a well-rounded and neutral editor. Finally, I belong to the experienced editors 'camp', not the arborsculpture 'camp'.duff 08:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Fetchcomms

Fetchcomms is away for a week, so I have tried to reply instead, see User talk:Fetchcomms#Treeshaping. Cheers, Chzz ► 13:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tree shaping

Hi, I've revert Martin's revert of your edit, thou I did make some changes to your edit. In the alternative names Grown furniture is the wording used in the the linked reference. I added a citation needed tag I did this by bracketing the word fact with these {{}}. I put arborsculpture back because that what Martin and others would have done anyway. I think wikipedia policies show that it doesn't need to be there, but with 5/4 editors to me the policies doesn't seem to matter. Blackash have a chat 13:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

You have new messages (last change).

—fetch ·comms 01:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replacement of photo of Beckies' Mirror

Hi Sydney Bluegum, I've changed the reflection in the mirror as well as the background. Here is the file my mirror. Try reading this article about placing images on main pages. Using images Blackash have a chat 03:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Life funny, it seem you put the image up just in time for it to be deleted. I give wrong permissions or something I'm getting it fixed and hopefully I can put them back soon. Thanks for putting it up. I've now added the methods and made some small changes to the text. Blackash have a chat 04:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheatsheet for editing

Hi, when I was first editing I found this page to be very useful Editing Cheatsheet. I added some formatting to your comment as it wasn't showing up on the talk page. Blackash have a chat 01:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notification

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed Topic Ban for Blackash and Slowart on Tree shaping related articles where I have proposed that you be considered for inclusion in the proposed WP:Topic ban. Johnuniq (talk) 07:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tree shaping

There is a proposed Topic Ban for Blackash and Slowart on Tree shaping related articles at the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents As you have had some involvement with these editors in question, you may wish to comment. Blackash have a chat 00:22, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Tree shaping and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks,

Arbitration case regarding tree shaping

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tree shaping/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tree shaping/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Richard Reames, copied and pasted from deleted material @ Tree shaping

This is not your own contribution, so it must be properly attributed. Here's how: Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one page into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to make a note in an edit summary at the source page as well. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you.

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tree shaping

An arbitration case regarding Tree shaping has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

The topic covered by the article currently located at Tree shaping, interpreted broadly, is placed under discretionary sanctions.
User:Blackash is topic banned from all discussion on the correct name for the tree shaping/arborsculpture/pooktre topic for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace, but only covers discussion of what name should be given to the practice, and what title should be used for any articles on the subject.
User:Sydney Bluegum is topic banned from the subject of tree shaping/arborsculpture/pooktre widely construed for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace.
User:Slowart is topic banned from all discussion on the correct name for the tree shaping/arborsculpture/pooktre topic for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace, but only covers discussion of what name should be given to the practice, and what title should be used for any articles on the subject.
The community is urged to open up a discussion, by way of request for comment, on the article currently located at Tree shaping to determine the consensus name and scope for the subject matter, whether it should stand alone or whether it is best upmerged to a parent article. To gain a broad consensus, naming and scope proposals should be adequately laid out and outside comments invited to gain a community-based consensus. This should be resolved within two months of the closing of this case. Parties that are otherwise topic banned are allowed to outlay proposals and background rationale at the commencement of the discussion, and to answer specific queries addressed to them or their proposals. This concession is made due to their experience and familiarity with the area.
Within seven days of the conclusion of this case, all parties must either delete evidence sub-pages in their user space or request deletion of them using the {{db-author}} or {{db-self}} template.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dougweller (talk) 15:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RM comment

Sydney Bluegum, per the ArbCom ruling, you were allowed to make a comment in the RM. Since it was fairly long at 750 words, I removed a section which appeared to be unrelated to the specific naming debate, and am moving it here:

Sydney is sad

While I’m briefly ungagged I wish to express my dissatisfaction at my treatment at Arbcom.
Ellen of the Roads put up the evidence against me. It was the same evidence presented twice once in talk format and next as a diff and claimed it was two different sets of evidences of my behaviour.

Misinformation example- She stated that I had been previously been banned which was untrue. I believe this influenced other editors to see me in a unkind light. It took ages for this to be corrected, by that time the vote was ended.

I also am ashamed of the other editors who were quick to judge without reading the evidence if they had they would have picked the double dipping up.

Evidence presented by Elen of the Roads was an untruth regarding what I Supposedly stated eg Slowart used achainsaw to cut down trees. What I said was that arborsculpture was a term which described what overseas visitors (eg Canadians) did with chainsaws at shows and exhibitions (similar to state fairs).

I can’t believe that Ellen of the Roads didn’t pass the whole thing on to another editor when she didn’t have the time due to family crisis. As a result of this Duff, Grisum, Martin Hogbin and Colincbn were not investigated as they should have been in a proper Arbcom case.

Because due process was not followed in the Arbcom case and in RfC (RfM seems ok as editors were notified) I believe this is reflected in the general community as to why Wikipedia is not accepted as reliable source of information in secondary and tertiary institutions. This therefore lets down all the genuine editors who devote their time and energy into making this encyclopaedia work.

Could some one please let me know what I need to do to appeal the Arbcom decision. I have asked Elen of the Roads and she hasn’t replied.

I feel this is my only opportunity to air my views due to my topic ban. If I ask for this info anywhere else I risk being fully banned from Wiki. Sydney Bluegum (talk) 09:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

If any editors have specific questions about your post as it relates to the naming issue, you are allowed to respond. Other than that, please do not participate any further in the discussion.

Regarding your question about the ArbCom case and how it can be appealed: Sorry, but this is the end of the line. ArbCom's decision is final. My best advice at this point would be to try and find some other part of the project to work on, un-related to this topic area. We have millions of articles, surely there is some other location where you would like to help out? --El on ka 15:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification of ArbCom ruling

I have made a Request for clarification of an ArbCom ruling that involves you here. Colincbn (talk) 05:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again,[1] you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. El on ka 13:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Sydney Bluegum. 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.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

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!} 01:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]