User talk:Djano Chained

Welcome!

Hi Djano Chained! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 14:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editor anonymity

In reply to this.

Editors should be allowed to be anonymous. Edits are judged on their content and sourcing, not on who made the edit. Doxing is a very real problem that can be used to silence editors who rightly fear for their safety. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1. Some editors could be physically harmed if people knew their identity. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Violence is not good. But if people not like what is being written about them they have right to protest and act through legal means. Freedom of speech is both way. Right Djano Chained (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If Vladimir Putin does not like what our articles say, he should not be able to make individual editors face consequences if we can help it. Not every country is as free as the US and UK. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If Russia is not as much free as US and UK. Why we need to bother. They will ban us anyway. Just like China. But here we are not talking about Russia or China. Djano Chained (talk) 18:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that countries like Russia and Saudi Arabia have put Wikipedia editors in prison for saying things that they did not agree with. We should not make it easier for dictators to imprison our editors. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doxing has serious consequences. I have experienced doxing, and my children have been followed. My family, my life, and my career have been upended causing me to lose huge amounts of money. Part of that was related to Wikipedia editing. If an editor misuses Wikipedia to libel someone, we do not protect them, but if they are documenting what reliable sources say, they are doing what we are supposed to do here, and that is allowable behavior, so the Wikimedia Foundation should protect such editors. That's what this ANI business in India is about. It is not about some editor who libeled anyone. India is now attacking our normal practices here.

You need to read our WP:BLP policy. We treat private persons differently than WP:Public figures. If someone doesn't like what is written about them, they can come here and complain, right on the talk page of their article, but they must not make any legal threats. That has a chilling effect, and we do not allow that. We will work with them, but we will not fail to document what reliable sources say about them just because it offends them. If they don't like what reliable sources say, they should change their own actions, not complain that their actions were criticized.

If they believe a reliable source has libeled them, they can sue that source and should not involve Wikipedia and its editors. Editors at Wikipedia are legally protected in the United States, partially by the Barrett v. Rosenthal decision, which allows the republication (not publication) of even libelous material on the internet. Only the originator can be sued. Editors can cite reliable sources that make seriously libelous and totally false claims, as long as they do it in the proper manner described at WP:Public figures. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Djano Chained!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Djano Chained! I'm Ozzie10aaaa, and I've been assigned as your mentor. About half of new Wikipedia accounts receive a mentor chosen randomly from a list of volunteers. It just means I'm here to help with anything you need! We need to have all kinds of people working together to create an online encyclopedia, so I'm glad you're here. Over time, you will figure out what you enjoy doing the most on Wikipedia.

You might have noticed that you have access to a tutorial and suggested edits. It's recommended that you take advantage of this, as it'll make learning how to edit Wikipedia easier.

If you need assistance with anything or have any questions, click on the "Get editing help" button on the bottom right corner of your screen. This will open up a module with links to help pages and a place to ask me questions. You can also ask me questions directly on my talk page, or go here to get help from the wider community.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hilarious

Thanks for the laughs. This is a wonderful comedy-only account. May I ask where you studied the dramatic arts? Your acting skills are second to none. To anyone who doubts the relevance of studying the performing arts, this account is proof positive that vibrant opportunities await you! Viriditas (talk) 23:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious as I am over Djano and their contributions (read: unconvincing arguments) this comment isn't any less inappropriate, and assumes bad faith in an otherwise recent editor. Well, yeah, the bad faith page we have is supposed to be funny, but this isn't. Mocking other editors isn't the way to go no matter what we would feel about them. Carlinal (talk) 02:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the comment I linked to again. It directly undermines everything Wikipedia stands for and proposes a kind of authoritarian system in its place in which freedom is absent. I stand by my comment and will continue to mock the fascists among us at every available opportunity. Furthermore, we need more mockery, not less. The first thing the authoritarians try to do is go after those that mock, because they cannot tolerate dissent of any kind. Viriditas (talk) 02:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asking WMF to send an editor to argue for them in court is not appropriate and is borderline harassment [1]. Ratnahastin (talk) 02:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask what your goal is at Wikipedia?

Hello, Djano Chained. Wikipedia is a volunteer project to build an online encyclopedia. I notice that you have no article edits, and that virtually all of your edits are your opinions about the lawsuit by Asian News International against the Wikimedia Foundation in an Indian court, such as your edits at Talk:Asian News International and Wikipedia talk:2024 open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation.

Wikipedia is not a social media platform, and this is not the place to simply vent your thoughts about the lawsuit if you are not planning to contribute to articles here, so I have to ask you, why are you here? In addition, if you are connected in any way to the case, the court, or the Indian government then you may have a conflict of interest. I will give you additional information about this in a standardized message below. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About conflict of interest

Hello, Djano Chained. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Wikipedia talk:2024 open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 05:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About free speech

See this explanation. Bishonen | tålk 15:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 15:25, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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.

Drmies (talk) 15:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]