User talk:Balazs38

Deleted comment

@Bbb23:Please explain in more detail why did you delete my comment? It was not personal attack against anyone, it was concise, and it addressed one real issue with some of the sources. It was meant as an answer to the request of Vanamondo who said that analysis of sources would be helpful. Thank youBalazs38 (talk) 23:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I were you, I'd stay away from the AfD. You have nothing new/constructive to say. You're not alone in that, but I'm now removing comments that are in that vein.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:05, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23:I understand that you're trying to keep the page clean, but how is this point regarding criminal record not constructive? Shouldn't it be considered when talking about the sources? Balazs38 (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23:Please answer when you can.Balazs38 (talk) 21:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Double vote

@Bbb23: I saw you striked out my second delete vote. I wasn't aware it will count as double vote. Can I change it to 'comment'? Balazs38 (talk) 21:07, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks. Balazs38 (talk) 21:12, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. MarioGom (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Balazs38. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Shenphen Rinpoche, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. MarioGom (talk) 18:45, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that shared accounts are not allowed: WP:NOSHARING. --MarioGom (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MarioGom: Thank you for the provided links. Do I understand correctly that I can still post in the Shenphen Rinpoche talk page, but not edit the article itself (except with request edit template or through WP:COIN)? I think that there are some WP:BLP issues that other editors have not yet resolved. I intend to keep my posts neutral, as requested in WP:BLPCOI. (Balazs38 (talk) 20:20, 3 September 2018 (UTC))[reply]

@MarioGom:As for WP:NOSHARING, I will change the password, so that only one person (me) will have access and write comments. (Balazs38 (talk) 20:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC))[reply]

@Balazs38: Yes, you can continue posting to the talk page, either with the request edit template to propose specific changes or without it for general discussion. WP:COIN is just to report breaches of COI policies, so it should not be used to request changes. --MarioGom (talk) 21:02, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Balazs38: - Please see WP:NLT as well and familiarize yourself with that policy - It is important to refrain from making comments that others may reasonably understand as a legal threat. To avoid misunderstandings, use less charged wording, such as "that statement is false and damaging, and I ask that it be corrected." This edit summary is not good and some of the language used in this lengthy talk page post is not ideal either - To allege otherwise is a blatant lie and a criminal offence which we reserve the right to engage in court. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 08:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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 recently 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 any 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.

JimRenge (talk) 23:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A note

Please make sure that when discussing the behaviour or interests of other editors, you abide by our policy on harassment and refrain from commenting on personal information, such as their real-world location, unless they have previously revealed that information themselves on Wikipedia. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

1. three months' topic ban from all edits concerning living people that profess Buddhism or that belong to any Buddhist community, congregation, or organisation, whatever its nature may be and
2. indefinite one-way interaction ban in respect of MacPraughan

You have been sanctioned in the light of your previous disruptive edits and of this edit, where you accuse another editor of having a CoI and of trying to discredit the article subject without evidence against policy (see, for instance, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms#Casting aspersions).

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Editing of Biographies of Living Persons#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. $Salvio$ ^{Let's talk about it!} 16:36, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]