MarioWiki:Appeals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Tags: Replaced Manual revert
Line 3: Line 3:


==Cases==
==Cases==
''None at the moment.''
===Koopa con Carne===
*[[User:Koopa con Carne#Last warning]]
====Koopa con Carne====
*The entire "don't question admins" attitude is vague. Admins are users with a few more responsibilities in the wiki's and community's upkeep, not some unquestionable force. From strictly a courtesy standpoint, my remark was hardly that horrible and came from a poor reading of admin Mario's intentions within her statement, which she has since clarified to me.<br>Re ", you didn't need to go onto Mario's talk page when the discussion should've stayed on the article at hand - this further escalated the conflict"<br>I only saw she replied to that discussion at List of internet references after I left a message on her talk page, which is typically how edit summaries are discussed, and how potential edit conflicts are defused.
====Technetium====
----

Revision as of 20:37, December 26, 2024

This page is an appeal system for reminders, warnings, and last warnings. If you feel you have wrongly received a reminder or a warning, follow the instructions below to appeal the reminder/warning to the administrators. Please keep discussions civil.

Archived appeals can be found here. This page observes the no-signature policy.

Notes

If you feel that you have been wrongfully given a reminder and/or warning, you can have your case heard here. Please read through the "How to" and the "Rules" carefully. Please note that both the users appealing the reminder/warning and the users who issued the reminder/warning are given a chance to present the administrators with reasons to rule in their favor. However, said comments can only be edited once; this will not expand into lengthy, back-and-forth arguments such as the ones found in proposal comments and talk page discussions.

Rules

  1. No case can be heard more than once. Once a decision is made, that decision is final.
  2. If the reminder or warning you issued is overturned, do not re-add it, or it will be removed immediately, and you may be reprimanded yourself if the administrators feel it is necessary.

How to

This is an example of what your appeal should look like; improperly formatted appeals will be deleted. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the "Cases" section. Then replace the "[subject]" variables (including the squared brackets) with the proper information.

===[Your username here]===
*[Insert link to reminder/warning from your talk page]
====[Your username here]====
*[Insert your comments on why the reminder/warning was unnecessary]
====[The issuer of the warning's username here]====
*[Insert your comments on why the reminder/warning was necessary (this section is for the issuer only)]
----

Important: After posting your appeal, make sure that you use {{appeal notice}} to inform the issuer that their warning/reminder is under dispute.

Cases

Koopa con Carne

Koopa con Carne

  • The entire "don't question admins" attitude is vague. Admins are users with a few more responsibilities in the wiki's and community's upkeep, not some unquestionable force. From strictly a courtesy standpoint, my remark was hardly that horrible and came from a poor reading of admin Mario's intentions within her statement, which she has since clarified to me.
    Re ", you didn't need to go onto Mario's talk page when the discussion should've stayed on the article at hand - this further escalated the conflict"
    I only saw she replied to that discussion at List of internet references after I left a message on her talk page, which is typically how edit summaries are discussed, and how potential edit conflicts are defused.

Technetium