User talk:Sloppyjoes7

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Sloppyjoes7, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- KHM03 20:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Four Corners[edit]

Thanks for your help mopping up the mess that the recent media coverage did to the Four Corners articles. I was cringing seeing the article going down the toilet. I did what I could, but was busy and didn't have the time to research. Thanks again.Dave (talk) 04:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022[edit]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Julia Collins (Jeopardy! contestant), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. That edit summary of yours was unacceptable. Drmies (talk) 02:05, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

I did not vandalize. My edit was not vandalization. My edit summary is factual, and supported by all citations and all evidence. If you have evidence or a source that my edit was factually incorrect, or misleading, or unsupported, I am open to hearing it. Sloppyjoes7 (talk) 02:22, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To further clarify and explain why this accusation of "vandalism" is false, and the description of the edit as "unacceptable" is entirely unsupported by Wikipedia guidelines, the second sentence of the article Julia Collins (Jeopardy! contestant) stated "She is best known for being a 20-day champion on the quiz show Jeopardy! with the most consecutive wins of a female contestant until Amy Schneider surpassed her December 29, 2021."

This sentence erroneously states that Julian Collins had the record "until" December 29, 2021. In December 29, 2021, an individual did indeed exceed 20 days as the champion, but that individual (Amy Schneider) is described as a "trans woman" in the Wikipedia article on Amy Schneider. To understand what this means, the article on "trans women" states that "transgender" as "an umbrella term for persons whose gender identity or expression (masculine, feminine, other) is different from their sex (male, female) at birth". Furthermore, that article clarifies "Thus trans women fall under the umbrella of being transgender because their gender was assigned male at birth but they identify as a woman."

Therefore, when my edit clarified that on December 29, 2021, the individual who surpassed 20 days as champion did not change the fact that Julia Collins held the record as the longest record-holding female, this is consistent with both the article on Amy Schneider and the article on Trans woman.

Furthermore, the edit is consistent with Wikipedia's policies, and is also consistent with the Wikipedia Manual of Style/Gender identity.

So, it is currently unknown why an administrator (Drmies) would not only revert the edit making this correction, but threaten sanctions for doing so. This threat of blocking my account from editing is entirely unsupported by any guidelines, or by any factual analysis of the edit in question.

```` Sloppyjoes7 (talk) 07:07, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To further explain why this threat of being blocked is indefensible, here is one source on the issue:

According to Yale, ^[1] "In 2001, a committee convened by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), a nonprofit think tank that took on issues of importance to the national health, addressed the question of whether it mattered to study the biology of women as well as men. [...] The committee advised that scientists use these definitions in the following ways:

In the study of human subjects, the term sex should be used as a classification, generally as male or female, according to the reproductive organs and functions that derive from the chromosomal complement [generally XX for female and XY for male].
In the study of human subjects, the term gender should be used to refer to a person's self-representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions on the basis of the individual's gender presentation." ^[2] Sloppyjoes7 (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Harrison, Rick. "What Do We Mean By Sex and Gender?". Yale School of Medicine. Retrieved 18 April 2022.
^ Wizemann, TM (2001). "Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Understanding the Biology of Sex and Gender Differences; Wizemann TM, Pardue ML, editors. Exploring the Biological Contributions to Human Health: Does Sex Matter?". National Academies Press (US). doi:10.17226/10028.

ANI thread involves you[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#POV_pushing_from_user:Sloppyjoes7

Dronebogus (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I first started editing Wikipedia around 20 years ago, before I created this account. At the time, in general, presenting factual information seemed to be the goal of Wikipedia. And over the years, I was generally thanked for edits, and I would irregularly make minor corrections here and there.

But things have apparently changed. It is gravely concerning how, multiple times, over a handful of edits in the past week, a few editors (and one admin) are pushing fringe theories that violate WP:FRINGE Wikipedia guidelines. As I am unfamiliar with the seemingly bureaucratic changes that have occured over the past decade or so, I am not quite sure how to address these false accusations that have been made, or the correct procedures I should follow in order to ensure that corrective action is taken. Sloppyjoes7 (talk) 00:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Community sanction imposed[edit]

Per this ANI complaint, you are now subject to a commmunity-imposed indefinite topic ban (WP:TBAN) from the topic area of gender and sexuality (WP:GENSEX), broadly construed (WP:BROADLY). The sanction has been logged at WP:RESTRICT. See WP:UNBAN for your appeal options. El_C 09:37, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Block[edit]

To enforce edit restrictions placed by the community, and for a violation to it, as seen in this diff,

you have been blocked from editing for 48 hours. You are welcome to make useful contributions once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. El_C 01:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: Edit restrictions placed by the community are enacted by community consensus. In order to overturn this block, you must either receive the approval of the blocking administrator or consensus at a community noticeboard (you may need to copy and paste their statement to a community noticeboard).

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sloppyjoes7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

First, my topic ban is utterly unfounded. I simply haven't gone through the process to appeal it because I haven't had time. Secondly, I didn't violate the topic ban. I didn't make any edit related, in any way, to transgenderism or gender in general. Sloppyjoes7 (talk) 17:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your topic ban is not unfounded, it was implemented as a result of strong community consensus. You blatantly violated the topic ban, which includes all topics regarding gender and sexuality, broadly construed, when you changed a header from "LGBTQ rights" to "marriage views" with an edit summary that also violated your topic ban. If you don't understand how edits regarding the LGBTQ+ community and discussion of same-sex marriage are related to gender and sexuality, I imagine you will not be able to abide by the ban. Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

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) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Harrison, Rick. "What Do We Mean By Sex and Gender?". Yale School of Medicine. Retrieved 18 April 2022.

[2] Wizemann, TM (2001). "Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Understanding the Biology of Sex and Gender Differences; Wizemann TM, Pardue ML, editors. Exploring the Biological Contributions to Human Health: Does Sex Matter?". National Academies Press (US). doi:10.17226/10028.

[1]

[2]