User talk:Esoglou: Difference between revisions

Since my indefinite banning from Wikipedia has been decided and will, I expect, come into effect in a matter of hours, it is not worthwhile in the short time left to continue the projects I had begun or the discussions in which I was involved. It is worthwhile to take this opportunity to assure you all, whether we agreed on most things or few things, or disagreed on almost everything, of my best wishes for your happiness. Esoglou (talk) 19:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Esoglou -- I was so sorry to read your comment just above. I don't know what led to this, but perhaps just a short wiki-break would do you good, and you can think about what happened and what you could have done differently, and what you can do differently upon your return, which I hope is soon. An indefinite block means just that. It's not a specific time period. After a few days or weeks, I think you could submit an appeal to be unblocked. You have been helpful to me on several occasions, fixing problems I've found in articles, and you have much to offer. Please don't give up completely. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 23:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Esoglou -- Though in full agreement, I dare not follow CorinneSD's entry with words that can only fall short of her brevity and eloquence, so I'll simply say yes, please do all you can do to return soon. Dave Peters (talk) 00:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ciao Esoglou, I don't know the reasons behind your block, but I hope that you will be back soon! I will miss your rigour and competence in Vatican related articles. A presto, Alex2006 (talk) 06:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An arbitration request regarding actions of some editors in the Christianity and Sexuality topic has now closed and the decision can be read here. The following remedies have been put in place:

1. User:Esoglou and User:Padresfan94 have been site banned. Both users may appeal their bans after one year.
2. User:Roscelese is indefinitely restricted from making more than one revert per page per day (except for indisputable vandalism and BLP violations), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. They are also prohibited from making rollback-style reverts without providing an explanation, and from engaging in conduct that casts aspersions or personalises disputes.
3. User:Dominus Vobisdu is admonished for edit warring. In addition, they are restricted to one revert per page per day, and are required to discuss content reversions on the article talk page. This restriction may be appealed after twelve months.

For the Arbitration Committee, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 02:27, 7 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

User:Lankiveil: This is a very misguided and hypocritical decision. Banning Esoglou without also banning User:Roscelese, who is the principal cause of the problems which led to this, is a disgrace for all who made the decision. You should all be ashamed of yourselves! Afterwriting (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Afterwriting: I'm just the messenger, take it up with the ArbCom if you disagree with the decision. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:27, 7 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia in the past days. Appreciate. Alvin the Almighty (talk) 08:21, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This must be a mistake. I made no contributions to the English Wikipedia in November 2015. Esoglou (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho: On my return here I see that last year you took pleasure in appending to my personal page on your own authority a notice showing you had been successful in having me banned. You remember how you began by taking pleasure in stating as an evident fact that my citation of a book for which I gave the Google Books link was a deliberate falsehood. And it must have given you pleasure too to say – I took your word for it, although you did not take mine – that you simply could not access it on any of the examples of Internet links on which I assured you I could access it, sites in USA, Belgium, Germany, France, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, United Kingdom, etc. Perhaps you would have continued to deny it, even if at that time I had thought of uploading screen shots from my computer showing the actual connections to these sites and others, which I am not allowed to do now, although I once again assure you I can access the sites.

In any case, that is now just a matter of the past, one that I doubtless should not even have mentioned, even as part of my last contribution. Esoglou (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]