User talk:Salvio giuliano
|If you feel that I have reverted an edit or issued a warning in error, please
and let me know. I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please don't interpret an error (even a really stupid one) on my part as a personal attack on you. It's not, I promise. I ask you to simply bring it to my attention; I am always open to civil discussion. Thank you.
If you are here to inquire as to why I deleted an article you created, please read this page and, if it does not satisfy your curiosity, please drop me a line, .
Admin policy. Fellow administrators, if you disagree with one of my admin actions, please feel free to revert it. I just kindly ask you to leave an informative edit summary as to why you think I made a mistake; alternatively, if you prefer, you can leave a note on my talk page.
Finally, seeing as I am awfully forgetful lately, if you have asked me something either here on in private and I have not replied within a reasonable time, please do not hesitate to contact me again.
|“||→ The only thing that has to be finished by next Friday is next Tuesday.||”|
—Today's Motto of the Day
- 1 Apologies
- 2 The Signpost: 26 February 2014
- 3 Email
- 4 Discussion  on talk page of 2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the Laccadive Sea 
- 5 Discussion  2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the in the Laccadive
- 6 Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies)
Salvio, I've struck the note I left the clerks in the recent case request. I should have paid more attention to the wording of your decline. I hope you will accept my apologies for what was an error of judgement on my part. Carcharoth (talk) 20:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
- @Carcharoth:, don't worry. I realise I should have worded my vote differently to make my intent clearer (someone, can't remember who, has proposed that, in future, deal with by motion should be used instead and I agree). I also apologise if my reaction has appeared hostile. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 February 2014
- Special report: Diary of a protester—Wikimedian perishes in Ukrainian unrest
- Traffic report: Snow big deal
- WikiProject report: Racking brains with neuroscience
- Featured content: Odin salutes you
- Recent research: CSCW '14 retrospective; the impact of SOPA on deletionism
- Hi Pine, I am not a list moderator, so I cannot moderate your e-mail through. I'll ping Roger Davies and AGK, to see what one of them can do. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- Found it, Pine, and replied. Roger Davies talk 12:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
@Salvio : Just thought that I'd share a few comments regarding your posting :
- 1/ FYI ArbCom falls under dispute resolution procedures. This article has undergone dispute resolution cycles and just to take a couple of examples (I am not going to list all of them and waste time & bandwidth), please refer to this ROBERTIKI's contrib history  and you will see therein submissions made by this user at dispute resolution noticeboard. I am sure you can search and find other instances and other users who have resorted to disruptive edits and misuse of dispute resolution procedures as per [WP:BRD].
- 2/ On your user-page you define yourself as "editor, an administrator and, currently, an arbitrator here on Wikipedia". You should therefore know that your suggestion of discretionary sanctions have been authorised for all articles about India, Pakistan & Afghanistan, cf. WP:ARBIPA is patently misleading because it is a half-truth. Kindly refer to the recommendations and rules defining discretionary sanctions detail the context, circumstances and procedures under which they are supposed to be used. You will notice that these discretionary sanctions were discussed and agreed-upon as a means to end edit-wars for India-Pakistan disputes. You can see the discussion pages for more detail on the use of discretionary sanctions viz India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries.
- 3/ Being Italian yourself, has it occurred to you that you expose yourself to scrutiny for these comments that can be perceived as being biased & and even bordering on hostile/intimidation (since you are speaking of unilateral sanctions so early-on in a discussion which is against regular recommendations of dispute resolution & WP:AE) ?
- 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- I'll reply there. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:16, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
As you may read, one editor after reverting my edits, refuses to discuss the reasons, writing: "You are parroting the same thing over and over again. I am unwilling now to continue repeating myself." I am not sure if I may start now WP:AE. Any suggestions ? --Robertiki (talk) 16:28, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- That's a good-faith content dispute, so my suggestion would be to go to WP:BLPN... Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- @Salvio: Your participation is solicited in the thread How to stop a page being 'gamed' ? because I have opened a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I have made mention to the earlier interaction about WP:ARBIPA and so thought that you should be informed.
- My IP has indeed changed but I cannot do much about it (see talk page for reason). So, as you know I am the Belgian based contributor. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 07:56, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — 10.4.1.125 (talk) 00:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)