?oygul

Welcome!

Hello, ?oygul, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Elonka 22:17, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Notification

?oygul (talk · contribs), accusing other editors of censorship[1][2] is not helpful, and is considered an adversarial approach. There are also concerns that you are a very new editor (account created in March 2011, and fewer than 100 edits), and that you are immediately jumping into a topic area (Pleaching, Tree shaping) that has been the subject of several longrunning disputes. You have been edit warring, and using adversarial language. This behavior is considered disruptive. Please be advised that any uninvolved administrator is authorized by the Arbitration Committee to place restrictions on editors in this topic area, at the administrator's own discretion. Please consider this a formal warning:

As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Tree shaping, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.

• Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose discretionary sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
• The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
• Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to the arbitration decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
• Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be an additional warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary. To avoid sanctions, please avoid making accusations at other editors, and avoid reverts or edit-warring. You are, however, allowed and encouraged to engage in civil and collegial discussion at the appropriate talkpages.

Please let me know if you have any questions, --Elonka 13:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Sock puppet

?oygul it seems one of the pro Arborsculpture editors thinks you are me [3]. They also seem to think you may by Sydney Bluegum. Follow the link to find the latest sock puppet case. Blackash have a chat 00:19, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Blackash for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:30, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Edited comment

FYI, I edited your comment (removing the part that wasn't a question) and moved it to a different part of the RM, since it was a question to Blackash, not to Slowart.[4] --Elonka 15:48, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, since the RM is a long and complex discussion, I moved your recent comment up into the section where you had commented previously.[5] If you don't feel that it fits there properly, go ahead and try moving it around, but please keep it in that section. For example, some editors might add it right after their original statement, with a prefix like "(addendum)". Whatever you do, I'll keep an eye on it and tweak again as needed, until we can find something that works. --Elonka 15:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

It is fine where you put it, but please don't change my formatting. ?oygul (talk) 21:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the bolding, and indented it slightly. Because of the complexity of the discussion, each participant should have all of their comments only in a single bullet-point section. If you would like to make other comments, best would be to make them in a separate section of the page. --Elonka 16:05, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

?oygul, please keep comments at Talk:Tree shaping focused on the topic, and not on other editors. If you would like to refute a statement about the subject, that's fine. But attacking the motivations of another editor is not. I have removed two of your recent comments since they were inappropriately targeting another editor.[6][7] If you wish, you can try posting something else that is focused strictly on the topic. If any of your other edits are construed as disruptive though, your access to the page may be restricted. --Elonka 00:21, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

3 questions 2 answers ?

[8] On August 3rd I asked, "Have you edited the "tree shaping" article under a different account name in the past ? Are you or do you know any of the people mentioned in the article ? Are you connected to the subject in anyway ? You said "No and No". What 2 questions are you saying no to ? and the 3rd ? Slowart (talk) 01:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

As you are a suspected sock puppet, and you have removed the "Awards and Honers" [[9]] from the bio of Blackashe's rival, [[10]] The information you removed can of course be presented by saying "according to Dr. John Gathright..." or according to his book, arborsculpture... Removing information without looking for a better citation and insist someone else find you a proper citation is simply WP:BATTLEGROUND IMO and I'll have to skip this contest of yours and work with editors who want to build and improve. Slowart (talk) 04:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Metzgeriales

The phrase "type material" was correct. This refers to material collected as the nomenclatural type for the name, not material of a particualr kind. "Type" has a different meaning in botanical nomenclature. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Massive, unexplained deletion

I sure hope you didn't mean to do this, especially in view of the various issues related to this article. Your recent change has been reverted, and please be more careful in the future. Favonian (talk) 08:59, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes you are right I didn't mean to do that. I came into edit conflict when I tried to fix it, that must have been you. Thanks for fixing it for me. ?oygul (talk) 09:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I did it again, but I now know what I was doing wrong, and will make sure I don't do this again. ?oygul (talk) 09:13, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi ?oygul, I placed notes on a couple talkpages regarding the recent flurry of edits at Tree shaping. Also, just as a reminder, as soon as reverts start, please ensure that you are also explaining things at the article talkpage? That'll be the best way to try and keep things stabilized. Thanks, --Elonka 17:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks I'll do that. ?oygul (talk) 21:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Plants Collaboration of the month

I'm attempting to revive the Plant article COTM, and since you're a member of WikiProject Plants, you're being notified about this hopeful revival. Please feel free to propose articles for collaboration, and thanks for your consideration! Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Science lovers wanted!

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 02:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Pleaching

Ok I'll talk to you on the pleaching talk. Blackash have a chat 08:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Paulownia may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[guqin]], [[guzheng]], [[pipa]], [[koto (musical instrument)|koto]], and [[gayageum|kayagum]]. {{fact]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:16, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)