User talk:E.3

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, E.3. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 20:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Um guys ive throughly explained what happened, it was an accident on 12.12.2018 - and I didn't do similar again. There is no abuse here. I'm contributing to multiple wikis in a constructive fashion??????? and I have always been thorough and upfront with my conflicts of interest with all wikis.

I put the english talk on the russian wiki, as well as french, german chinese and spanish so they would KNOW that - only russian wiki decided to block.

Its quite unreasonable if you give me a global block, due to one simple misunderstanding on 12.12.2018 WHEN I WAS UNWELL.

I note that most wikis apart from English wiki are more than happy to have my contributions, and seriously, wikipedia is just so full of complicated rules, this has been most thoroughly unwelcoming to a new user who was just trying to help all of your projects. How am I meant to know all the policies at once? I suggest that the blocks are NOT constructive at all. E.3 (talk) 13:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Also has anyone even read what happened? Or are you just so thoroughly against any wikipedia contributor who is trying to address the cognitive bias that many people have about multiple constructs from an intenrational perspective? All wikipedias have been welcoming, apart from English. Especially commons. Just because I have a conflict of interest DOES not mean I can't contribute.

I note I stopped editing wikipedia all those years ago because of your editors responses to my contributions - you had Russian Freedom of Panorama wrong at the time, and it seems that now you're trying to say that Jordanian law applies in Palestine. A senior aggressive editor it seems either resigned or got banned over their editing of the English article. Chinese are very welcoming, as are French, Spanish, Portuguese, Serbian - Russian have just blocked because I was just telling them to.

This is very unreasonable a suggestion. It is against your policies worldwide to not be welcoming to new editors trying to learn the rules. No comments or considerations so far, just blocks from English, which I respect - but this is thourougly unreasonable. E.3 (talk) 13:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

For English Wikipedia, you should be working out which account you wish to be using, then address an appeal using the process at w:Wikipedia;UTRS. They wish for you to use one account, and have blocked others, so you just need to guide them to your preferred account, and explain that it was not a purposeful abuse. Presuming that you are not approving your own edits, and the same articles, or voting. As it is not a concealed episode you will probably get a light telling-off and given some direction to conforming. As the account is old, that may have guided thinking of sockpuppetry.

Where you have conflicted or vested interests, you should definitely declare them on your user page, never hide from those declarations. You should look to avoid CoI, where it is harder you should follow the enWP CoI process and look to discuss your proposed changes on the talk page first. CoI is really disliked and it comes from some being totally unethical about it, or paid editing.

Complaining about other wikis here is not going to be fruitful. We operate on consensus, and sometimes that means that you don't get your edits, thoughts included at first, so leave your thoughts clearly on talk pages, and others can pick them up. Don't think that suicide bomber, or flaming martyr will be successful.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Thankyou. I love and respect the Wikipedia projects a lot. However, as I suggest on my commons talk page, and my submission for "wikiwide" to meta, I have a complex relationship with the wikiprojects. E.3 (talk) 23:58, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Note on scope

It took me a few minutes to see what you were trying to do with the page; copying it to meta to escape an enwiki AfD isn't within scope. If you intend to translate it to other languages, metawiki also isn't the best place to do that. This is for coordination between editors globally, and not for coordination over Wikipedia content. In regard to the page being copied from enwiki, please attribute it to the enwiki article on the talk page per the CC BY-SA 3.0 license. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 11:38, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

its not trying to escape it at all. I just think that english wiki has come to consensus (ish) now. So its translateable like ive been aiming for the whole time? does that make sense? Thanks for your help E.3 (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

It’s translatable in the sense that all words can be translated. Meta is not the place to do this. Also, per copyright law, please attribute to the enwiki article on your userspace copy’s talk page. Vermont (talk) 12:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Ace. Thanks for the help. I just was trying to follow step 1. in the guidelines for translation, are they new? will do. all good E.3 (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

The guidelines you're looking at are not for Wikipedia content translation. It’s for Wikimedia/global pages, like Steward pages and global policies. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)