| Revision as of 16:09, 13 September 2006 editRadiant! (talk | contribs)36,918 edits →Merge to blocking policy: Do you have any objection to the ''substance'' of this policy?← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:53, 13 September 2006 edit undoFresheneesz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users9,055 edits →Merge to blocking policyNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| ::::: You're the one who obviously wants to merge it - so YOU fix it. However, since you suggest it, i'll not be lazy, and oblige to put a small note on BP's page. ] 00:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | ::::: You're the one who obviously wants to merge it - so YOU fix it. However, since you suggest it, i'll not be lazy, and oblige to put a small note on BP's page. ] 00:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *This is not a minority view - this is the way things work (see lists of blocked people, and related cats and newsfeeds). Asserting that things aren't consensual because they might not have been discussed as much as you like isn't very helpful. Do you have any objection to the ''substance'' of this policy? ] 16:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | *This is not a minority view - this is the way things work (see lists of blocked people, and related cats and newsfeeds). Asserting that things aren't consensual because they might not have been discussed as much as you like isn't very helpful. Do you have any objection to the ''substance'' of this policy? ] 16:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :: m, not really. Sorry, i'm being a jerk. ] 20:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:53, 13 September 2006
China
IN China, the government has blocked us from accessing Misplaced Pages. When I go onto an anonymous surfing program, Misplaced Pages doesn't permit me to edit any articles. :( ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!
- Probably because the IP used by the anonymizer was used at one time by a vandal. -Dandaman32 20:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
User Name: dvdhws1939. : I find myself blocked and can not understand why. I have made 2 contributions in the past week (they were my first) and both have been accepted. 1. A minor change to the entry for Dick White. 2. A new entry regarding Dick Forsman the ornathologist. I found myself blocked when I attempted to add a minor detail to information about my home town. Why? 15:05 21/08/2006
User Name: Rosser1954. can anyone out there tell me why I have been blocked? How do I find out the reason - nothing comes to mind or fits with your list of reasons for blocking. How does one contact the LOcal Administrator?
- As I have stated on your talk page, your user account is not blocked. If it were, you would not be able to post here. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 15:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Question on being blocked
Dear Sirs,
My name is Edward Lynch. I am originally from the United States and currently living in Taiwan. I have just moved into a new apartment where the internet connection is under the landlord's name and has been active during the tenure of at least two of the previous tennants. I have recently found that I have been blocked by an administrator who goes by the handle of Golden Wattle. I attempted to email this administrator but have found that I am unable to inquire as to why I have been blocked because I have been blocked. I am aware that the online community in Taiwan has a poor reputation and that perhaps many users of this same ISP have behaved badly in the past. I have never posted or edited anything on Misplaced Pages before. The reason for blocking me that was displayed -- "vandalism -- has been warned before" -- clearly does not apply to me. I would appreciate it very much if I could contact any pertinant administrator directly to settle this issue. My email address is tedwlynch@hotmail.com. Thank you.203.79.253.1 16:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Merge to blocking policy
This shouldn't be merged, it should be discussed at WP:BP, this information was recently created - not moved from a policy page. Therefore, it is not policy yet, even if the information on it is consistant with policy - if that makes sense. Fresheneesz 03:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm afraid it does not. Codifying current practice is a valid way (and arguably, the best way) to create policy. And why shouldn't it be merged, btw? >Radiant< 15:01, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- The only valid way to create policy is through consensus. And this page shouldn't be merged without it. Fresheneesz 20:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- One thing that you seem not to understand is that the common outcome of a common process does equate to consensus. >Radiant< 20:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- The only valid way to create policy is through consensus. And this page shouldn't be merged without it. Fresheneesz 20:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- But the view of a minority on what that outcome is, is not neccessarily consensus - and i'd feel much better if this information were proposed on the talk page of WP:BP before it is added. Fresheneesz 21:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- You're the one who obviously wants to merge it - so YOU fix it. However, since you suggest it, i'll not be lazy, and oblige to put a small note on BP's page. Fresheneesz 00:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- This is not a minority view - this is the way things work (see lists of blocked people, and related cats and newsfeeds). Asserting that things aren't consensual because they might not have been discussed as much as you like isn't very helpful. Do you have any objection to the substance of this policy? >Radiant< 16:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- m, not really. Sorry, i'm being a jerk. Fresheneesz 20:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)