User talk:Mikedelis

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Emma Morano. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 09:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

clpo13_(talk) 19:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I noticed that you changed the personal pronouns of an individual in one of your recent edits. Wikipedia refers to all people, including transgender and nonbinary people, by the pronouns they have most recently requested for themselves; this applies to all phases of their lives, unless they have requested otherwise. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:53, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Imane Khelif, especially if it involves living persons. Your edits have been reverted. Thank you. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 16:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at Imane Khelif. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 17:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Wang Jie (taikonaut)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Wang Jie (taikonaut) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GoldRomean (talk) 00:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chen Zhongrui

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Chen Zhongrui requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GoldRomean (talk) 00:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

June 2025

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at Talk:Imane Khelif.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 19:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mikedelis (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please Unblock me i have learned from my mistakes. They reason i was blocked is because i misgendered Imane Khelif. I swear it will never happen again, i will respect trans people and always use the correct pronouns. Please give me a second chance, i promise i wont misgender anyone again. I just want to contribute to the community — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikedelis (talk • contribs) 22:05, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Conditionally unblocked per discussion below. Please see the next section for the full terms of your topic ban. Happy editing. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, I'd be somewhat sympathetic to this request, if it weren't for your previous block, which was also for misgendering Imane Khelif. In August you wrote on her article's talkpage He is a man and he will never be a real woman no matter how hard you and the woke mob cry and scream and then changed all the pronouns in the article; you were blocked 24 hours for that. If your previous block didn't convince you that such comments are unacceptable, why should a reviewing admin believe that this block will?

You also seem to still be implying that Khelif is trans, which as far as I know even those leaking her purported health information don't claim; we expect that someone editing in as difficult a topic as gender and sex will understand the difference between chromosomal sex and gender assigned at birth. (That's not a "woke" thing; even the most conservative biologist will agree that "it's a girl!" does not correlate 1:1 with having XX chromosomes.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 06:27, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, i am sorry for the misunderstanding, i do not imply that Khelif is trans, i fully and irrevocably recognize and understand the fact that she was born a woman. I now know that misgendering someone can trully dehumanize them and seriously hurt them. I swear it will NEVER happen again, i promise i will never discriminate or use wrong pronouns for anyone no matter what their gender and sexual identity. I have learnt my lesson, i will never risk offending a trans person again, knowing that there is even a small change knowing that if they read it they can be hurt psychologically, i don't want that, i swear i'm honest.--Mike_Delis (talk) 07:04, 5 June

There's no need to make new {{unblock}} requests when the one above is open; you can just reply as normal. You still haven't explained, why should we believe that you've learned from this block, when you didn't learn from the last block? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 07:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i used to frequent some very toxic internet circles that had poisoned my mind with anti-LGBTQ+ people hate. On my last ban, which lasted for 24 hours i didn't take it seriously and thought whatever it will end soon and i will be able to edit again. But now, with my permanent ban, which i 100% deserved, i came to the full realization of the seriousness of the situation, that i will never be able to edit wikipedia again. Since then i researched about queer individuals and learned how wrong it is to dehumanize them, that they are precious human beings and it is very bad for the wellbeing of the society to dehumanize and hurt them. I realized that these toxic circles i visited costed me the priviledge to be able to edit wikipedia as i did for 12 years. The seriousness of this permanent ban and my reflecting since it, make this different than the time i was banned for 24 hours. Now i fully understand the error of my ways, how it affected LGBTQ+ people, and how hurting my behaviour was to them. I made a lot of reflecting and i know that i am wrong, which is something i didn't do after the last ban. This time i swear, i will never do it again. Please give me one final chance and i will prove you i have changed. Mike_Delis (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So it's all the fault of the "very toxic internet circles" that you have been engaging in hate? What exactly do you have to offer the project? TarnishedPath^talk 14:22, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's 100% my fault that i left them poison my mind. I was full or unnecessary anger for people who are different than me, while i now understand that the true enemies are those who exploit our class while hoarding wealth. I will never offend LGBTQ+ people again, now that i know what a waste of human potential engaging in hate is.

Regarding what i have to offer to wikipedia, for the last 13 years i am passionate about Wikipedia and i regard it the largest dissemination of knowledge in the internet. I tried to expand articles about my local communities in Greece and correct mistakes whenever i spotted them. Please, i don't want to lose the priviledge to be part of this beneficial project. Wikipedia is creation, while hate is just unessecary destruction, i came to this realization. Please give me another chance.Mike_Delis (talk) 17:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess what I'm caught up on here is like... You're saying all the things I hope someone will say when I block them for hate speech, and I genuinely like getting to unblock people when they've learned not to be hateful toward others. But it only took you three hours after getting blocked to have this profound realization about the error of your ways. I've had a few times in my life where I reversed my position on something, and I don't think it's ever been that sudden. Could you elaborate on what exactly your thought process was in those three hours that made you change your mind about what was seemingly a deeply-held view beforehand? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 19:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The flip from anti-LGTBQI+ language to "there's no war, but class war" in a matter of hours seem far from organic. TarnishedPath^talk 04:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin, I'd suggest that if there was an unblock it, to mitigate the chance of further disruption, a topic ban may be appropriate. TarnishedPath^talk 04:59, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First a reply to @TarnishedPath. It was not a flip in a matter of hours, i always held class struggle beliefs, as you can see the Communist Party of Greece is against LGBTQ+ rights and they think they are a diversion from the need for collective, revolutionary action to dismantle capitalism. They even voted against same sex marriage in the parliament, unfortunately i used to agree with their views. After my recent reflection i came to the realization that liberation of ALL oppressed people is nessesary for the revolution, including LGBTQ+ individuals. So it was not an inorganic feint, but a smooth transition from old school soviet-style communism to a more modern and inclusive view.

Now, @Tamzin let me explain you my thought process. I won’t pretend that I suddenly became a completely different person in three hours, but it was a wake up call. Sometimes it takes a moment like that to jolt you into seeing something you hadn’t really questioned before. When i received the ban i had the realization that my actions have consequences, that LGBTQ people are not just an imaginary enemy, not a figure i see on the screen, they are real people and they can be deeply hurt by the things i say. I saw how i sounded not clever or edgy, just hurtful. That moment of clarity flipped a switch.

Also, it was not a complete 180 degree turn, it was a tipping point. I already started to become dissillusioned to this kind of hate, and the moment i changed Imane Khelifs pronouns was a sudden burst of anger. I saw her as a threat to cis-gendered women (now i know she is cis-gendered too) because she wanted to go and beat them up for her personal gain. But after my ban i overcame this tipping point, i felt ashamed with myself, that i should control my wrath, that LGBTQ people are not the enemy, i should not direct my anger at them. Internet hate is just used by the big guys in power to keep us divided and fighting each other, so they can keep exploiting us. Please, give me one Final chance and i will prove you that i truly changed, i will never offend LGBTQ+ people on Wikipedia again.Mike_Delis (talk) 07:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would only support an unblock here with a complete topic ban on Gender-related disputes or controversies and associated people, broadly construed (WP:CT/GG). That would include refraining from any edits to Imane Khelif. This would give the user a chance to demonstrate constructive editing, while making it very, very obvious that a reblock would be the immediate consequence for any further garbage. --Yamla (talk) 11:45, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm satisfied with Mike's answer to my question above, but agree that the best path back would be with the topic ban you mention, essentially for "trust, but verify" reasons. Mike, would you agree to that? I would be open to lifting the ban after six months of activity with no further issues, and you would also have the right of appeal to the community or other administrators. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:15, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i agree. I will refrain from editing all topic related to gender and sexuality. Thank you very much for giving me this chance, i promise you won't regret it.Mike_Delis (talk) 12:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are indefinitely topic-banned from gender-related disputes and controversies and related persons, broadly construed.

You have been sanctioned for the reasons discussed above

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender and sexuality#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the appeal process. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything above is unclear to you. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This sanction is indefinite, but as noted above, I am open to lifting it after six months of activity with no further issues. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]