| Revision as of 15:43, 5 July 2015 view source104.156.240.142 (talk) Undid revision 670063816 by 104.156.240.142 (talk)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:01, 12 March 2023 view source Legobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,667,807 editsm Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <center> (1x)Tag: Fixed lint errors | ||
| (28 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| {{unblock reviewed|reason= Reason given for block is almost entirely inaccurate. TheGracefulSlick , I warned them for this. The Banner , I warned them for this. Both warnings were warranted and both were heeded. I made of a removal of one of these warnings, which I acknowledge I should not have done and will not do again -- but that is hardly 'edit warring' nor does it merit being blocked. ] ] 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)|decline=Overall, I agree with the blocking admin's description of events leading up to your block. In future, if an editor leaves you a message saying that you are giving out too many warnings, don't respond by issuing another warning. ] (]) 18:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)}} | {{unblock reviewed|reason= Reason given for block is almost entirely inaccurate. TheGracefulSlick , I warned them for this. The Banner , I warned them for this. Both warnings were warranted and both were heeded. I made of a removal of one of these warnings, which I acknowledge I should not have done and will not do again -- but that is hardly 'edit warring' nor does it merit being blocked. ] ] 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)|decline=Overall, I agree with the blocking admin's description of events leading up to your block. In future, if an editor leaves you a message saying that you are giving out too many warnings, don't respond by issuing another warning. ] (]) 18:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)}} | ||
| {{Tmbox | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| | style = background: #f8eaba | |||
| ::Every comment has focused on your actions because you are the one entirely at fault. So in this case you were doing the tango with yourself, knocking into everyone else in the process. You need to learn to collaborate with others or you'll be having the same conversation with someone else. Don't ping me again, until you learn to look in the mirror. Bye.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 05:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
| | image = ] | |||
| | text = '''''This account has been ] indefinitely''''' as a ] that was created to violate Misplaced Pages policy. See ]. Note that using multiple accounts is ], but using them for ] reasons '''is not''', and that all edits made while evading a block or ban ]. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on the page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include "tlx|". -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the ] first. ] | ] 08:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)<!-- Template:uw-sockblock -->}} | |||
| {{unblock reviewed | 1= Request a set of completely uninvolved, neutral and fresh eyes to review this. I am absolutely not a sock, this is absurd. Blocking admin is involved and should not be blocking me repeatedly. He's friends with the Gamergate editors (where I am topic banned) who clearly contacted him trying to get him to block me. It's not a coincidence all of them are hounding me and he suddenly took so much interest in what I'm up to. | decline = I have read te SPI case and the evidence is even more compelling than a CU - which we could still do but don't need to. Your overall behaviour besides your sockpupetry is totally unacceptable for this collaborative environent and I have extended your block to include withdrawal of your talk page access. ] (]) 10:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)}} | |||
| :::], like I said, I'm only denying being 100% at fault, while you claimed I deny any wrongdoing. For instance when you , that was not 100% my fault. ] ] 05:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
| *I would provide evidence but I'm not sure what evidence I can provide that I'm me and not some other editor. It appears we were both interested in poker articles and User:2005 rubbed us both the wrong way with his abrasive editing style and the way he tries to WP:OWN all the poker articles. ] ] 08:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::It takes more than one person to edit war, that is true, but your behavior is often adding gasoline to a fire. I recommend that you read ] which says, in part, {{tq|In Misplaced Pages, vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content, in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Misplaced Pages. ...Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism.}} Edit warring and even disruptive edits are not necessary vandalism and calling someone a vandal or troll can be viewed as a ]. Remember that just because another editor acts poorly doesn't mean you have to take the low road with them. This is a brief time-out but future blocks will be longer if you don't change your combative behavior. Good luck! <font face="Papyrus" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 10:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | {{tld|unblock|Another involved admin. We had a disagreement at RfA and he has been following me around everywhere. I request a set of fresh eyes, who has had no prior interactions with me. I am not a sock. ] ] 10:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)}} | ||
| ::::::Perhaps because it is the truth? You were already edit warring/removing other peoples edits when I warned you about it. Not only did you persist in the edit war, you also placed bogus warnings on my talk page. And you started edit warring there when I removed that bogus warning. While you claimed to have the right to remove (valid) warnings, you denied me the right to remove bogus warnings. | |||
| *The abve unblock request can be ignred.It was being posted while I was actually activating the TPA withdrawal. User can go to ] or ] if they really want to appeal. ] (]) 10:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::But as others have said before: please change your combative attitude. The only effect from that behaviour is more and longer blocks. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 11:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==My RfA== | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" |{{#switch:{{lc:Oppose}} | |||
| |support= ] | |||
| |neutral= ] | |||
| |oppose = ] | |||
| |] | |||
| }} | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" |<div class="center"><u><big>'''Pavlov's RfA reward'''</big></u></div>{{Break}} | |||
| Thank for !voting at my recent ]. You voted '''Oppose''' so you get {{#switch:{{lc:Oppose}} | |||
| |support= a whopping three cookies, fresh from the oven! | |||
| |neutral= a reasonable two cookies, just cooling off. | |||
| |oppose= only one cookie, but a nice one. (Better luck next time.) | |||
| | ... to have a cookie anyway. | |||
| }}{{Break}} | |||
| All the best: ''] ]'',<small> 19:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC).</small><br /> | |||
| |} | |||
Latest revision as of 04:01, 12 March 2023
July 2015
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 13:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Handpolk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Reason given for block is almost entirely inaccurate. TheGracefulSlick blanked conversation on my talk page with a trolling edit summary, I warned them for this. The Banner was edit warring across multiple articles, I warned them for this. Both warnings were warranted and both were heeded. I made a single revert of a removal of one of these warnings, which I acknowledge I should not have done and will not do again -- but that is hardly 'edit warring' nor does it merit being blocked. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Overall, I agree with the blocking admin's description of events leading up to your block. In future, if an editor leaves you a message saying that you are giving out too many warnings, don't respond by issuing another warning. PhilKnight (talk) 18:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
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.
 | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Misplaced Pages policy. See Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/DegenFarang. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 08:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
|
Handpolk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Request a set of completely uninvolved, neutral and fresh eyes to review this. I am absolutely not a sock, this is absurd. Blocking admin is involved and should not be blocking me repeatedly. He's friends with the Gamergate editors (where I am topic banned) who clearly contacted him trying to get him to block me. It's not a coincidence all of them are hounding me and he suddenly took so much interest in what I'm up to.
Decline reason:
I have read te SPI case and the evidence is even more compelling than a CU - which we could still do but don't need to. Your overall behaviour besides your sockpupetry is totally unacceptable for this collaborative environent and I have extended your block to include withdrawal of your talk page access. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
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.
- I would provide evidence but I'm not sure what evidence I can provide that I'm me and not some other editor. It appears we were both interested in poker articles and User:2005 rubbed us both the wrong way with his abrasive editing style and the way he tries to WP:OWN all the poker articles. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 08:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
{{unblock|Another involved admin. We had a disagreement at RfA and he has been following me around everywhere. I request a set of fresh eyes, who has had no prior interactions with me. I am not a sock. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 10:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)}}
- The abve unblock request can be ignred.It was being posted while I was actually activating the TPA withdrawal. User can go to WP:BASC or WP:UTRS if they really want to appeal. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
My RfA
|
Pavlov's RfA reward Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Oppose so you get only one cookie, but a nice one. (Better luck next time.) |