Open main menu

Hello, Heitor C. Jorge, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! The Ogre (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

Block reviewEdit

 
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Chronus (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I request the review of the blocking period applied against me. I know I committed myself earlier not to enter into any dispute, but this situation was different. The dispute in the article Brazil is not a simple editing war. A single editor, who is being reversed by others (such as Fbergo) and has not even received any punishment, is altering the status quo without any prior discussion. Reverting to enforce certain overriding policies is not considered edit warring. I know I had already promised not to get involved in edit wars, but this case is different from the last. Moreover, I even did not break the three-revert rule this time. I am an experienced editor in other versions of the project (I am sysop in the lusophone version of Wikipedia) and I am not here to cause problems. I have been registered since 2009 in Anglophone Wikipedia and have almost 2,000 constructive editions and created articles. Have not all years of good history counted? I've been blocked for more than 10 days. I'm calling for a 2nd chance, please! Chronus (talk) 00:55, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Accept reason:

See below conditions. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Okay, you want a second chance, well here's my deal (also courtesy paging blocking admin Yamla):

  1. You agree to be under an indefinite one revert rule (1RR) restriction. That means you do not revert more than once per article per 24 hours. If you are in any doubt, don't revert.
  2. The restriction doesn't cover reverting obvious vandalism, copyright violations and other uncontroversial things that must be reverted per WP:3RRNO (but see point 1. above).
  3. You may able to appeal the restriction at a later date by starting a thread at WP:AN. I advise you not to do this until at least six months have passed, otherwise the appeal is likely to fail, and the restriction may possibly be extended.
  4. If you breach the restriction, you agree to be reblocked indefinitely with talk page access disabled. I don't mind a second chance, but a third?
  5. I'm not going to be following you around, stalking your edits to see if you go over 1RR. I trust you to be a grown-up and take the restriction seriously. However, this notice must remain on your talk page so other people can cross refer to it. Do not rely on "getting away with" because nobody's looking.

If both you and Yamla agree to these terms, I will ask Yamla to unblock (it's easier if a blocking admin reverses their own block after a discussion as it proves consensus was made). If Yamla doesn't agree I will have little choice but to decline your unblock request. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I would accept unblocking under these terms. Be really, really careful with the second point there. The rule of thumb is that obvious vandalism is replacing the page with "har har har", rather than replacing someone's cited birth year with an uncited and incorrect birth year. I mention this because Ritchie333's conditions are appropriate, but I don't want you to get caught up in a violation of the second point. Note also that I'll be away for much of the rest of the week. If I see a response here before I leave, and if that response is accepting these conditions, I'll lift the block myself. But if I'm away, Ritchie333 or another admin should feel free to lift the block if these conditions are accepted. --Yamla (talk) 15:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@Ritchie333 and Yamla: I accept and commit myself to all the conditions imposed. And I am very grateful for this second opportunity. Chronus (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@Ritchie333, Yamla, and Nosebagbear: One bot has closed my appeal for reviewing my edit restriction. Has my restriction been withdrawn? Chronus (talk) 07:17, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, it was auto-archived because no-one was editing it. Embarassingly I have no idea how to smoothly get 1 thing out of the ANI archives (an undo wouldn't work, as it's multiple actions) - so I've manually reposted it. Hopefully it's new position will gather some additional attention and get you over the line. Nosebagbear (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I have closed the thread with the result that the restrictions are lifted [1]. Ample time was given for anyone to voice objections, and none did. Happy editing. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying; I think I did get your ping about the AN thread but never got round to replying as I basically had no issue with you appealing, or with lifting the restriction. As Beeblebrox says, happy editing. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:18, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Blanking vs ArchivingEdit

Hi there,

I'd just like to ask whether you're blanking talk page discussions out of preference or not knowing how to archiving. It's certainly your right, it just makes it easier to check certain things (I came for your restriction review, but 95% of times it'd be for editing reasons). Nosebagbear (talk) 22:58, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: As I write much less in English-speaking Wikipedia compared to Portuguese, my discussion page here is not very hectic. So I did not bother to keep a file. Should I reenter the messages? Chronus (talk) 07:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
I wouldn't say there's a great benefit at this point. Might be worth not deleting things in the future until they're a year (or whatever suitable time) old? Nosebagbear (talk) 18:16, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
It's remarkably easy to set up "one click archiving" if you're so inclined, once it's on it's actually easier than removing things by editing them, as the name implies it takes but one click. If you want I can set it up for you in a matter of seconds. As a matter of policy you don't have to, but it makes finding old discussions much easier if ended. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:49, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Chronus".