User talk:Strider12

Hi there. Thanks for the information - let me confirm that your quote is perfectly in order. Let me also add that I gave up trying to contribute to the 'Abortion and mental health' and other abortion related articles when I realised that a few editors were 'guarding' those articles. I have since moved on to other areas where I feel my time making contributions will be better spent (ie - unlikely to be immediately reverted.) I admire the fact that you have not been intimidated into silence by the actions of other editors - feel free to quote any of the above in addition to the original quote you informed me about. Best wishes. Fishiehelper2 (talk) 10:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Strider12/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Strider12/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 21:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just use the spellchecker built into my browser (was Firefox, is now Safari). You'll find some discussion at Wikipedia:Spellchecking, including a link to a spellchecker that you can add to Internet Explorer 7. But if you're using a PC, I do highly recommend downloading Firefox and switching from IE7, if you've not already done so (apparently not). Firefox has much better security, as well as other features that IE doesn't have - in particular, I really, really like the search feature - it starts searching immediately as you type, so after typing a few letters, you're probably either going to have found what you're looking for, or know that it's not on the page you're searching. And for websites that absolutely insist on IE7 - well, downloading Firefox doesn't delete IE7; it's still there if you need it.

As far as other editing software, no, I just use the standard edit window. I know that there are other options, but I've gotten used to the edit window. My sense is that there isn't much reason to do anything else unless (a) you're a fan of another text editor, like vi or emacs; or (b) you want to use a Wikipedia-specific editor like WikEd or AWB for high-volume edits, such as reverting vandalism or fixing typos. Since I don't fall into either category, I've seen no reason so far to explore other options. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 12:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. I hope you don't mind my copying your font and note!?--Strider ^♫♫ 21:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! That's where it came from. I saw your new signature at an ArbCom page and wondered when you changed your sig. And speaking of ArbCom, nobody can know how it will come down but I'd like to think that it will end with probation, a 1RR restriction, and mentoring (I have voluntered). I've offered some evidence that I hope will help. I'm also offering some findings of fact that are mixed. I hope you don't take offense at anything I say (or other people say). I think you have made some good contributions and can be an asset to the project but you will have to make some changes in your modus operandi. Best wishes. Sbowers3 (talk) 00:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't take offense when I have made mistakes. Still trying to do better. Thanks for your edits and talk page efforts to cool the climate. It appears that IAA has either settled down or retreated, which also helps a great deal.--Strider ^♫♫ 14:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Strider12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year. Should Strider12 resume editing Wikipedia, she shall be assigned a volunteer mentor, who will be asked to assist her in understanding and following policy and community practice to a sufficient level that continued sanctions will not be necessary.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 12:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inasmuch as the ban expired more than 1.5 years ago, isn't it time to remove the "banned for one year" notice from Strider12's user page? Who is supposed to do that? NCdave (talk) 02:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Strider12. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

NCdave (talk) 05:38, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the "banned" notice. NCdave (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated several pages in your userspace for deletion via the WP:MfD process. You can find the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Strider12 userspace forks should you wish to contribute. MastCell ^Talk 18:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]