| Revision as of 16:58, 16 November 2006 editMisarxist (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,963 edits vandal warn← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:09, 17 November 2006 edit undoNotAWeasel (talk | contribs)41 edits pov pushing arab pagan scum not allowed on my page.Next edit → | ||
| Line 113: | Line 113: | ||
| ==Muslim Guild POV-pushers trying to get original article deleted to protect their POV Fork== | ==Muslim Guild POV-pushers trying to get original article deleted to protect their POV Fork== | ||
| Striver's POV-pushing cohort ] has, in a fit of his POV-pushing zeal, nominated ] for deletion . The cowardly bad faith POV-pusher wouldn't even sign his own name to the deletion request either. I thought you should be warned of this. ] 22:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC) | Striver's POV-pushing cohort ] has, in a fit of his POV-pushing zeal, nominated ] for deletion . The cowardly bad faith POV-pusher wouldn't even sign his own name to the deletion request either. I thought you should be warned of this. ] 22:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ] Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the ] if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits{{#if:Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#15 November 2006|, such as those you made to ],}} are considered ]. If you continue in this manner you may be '''] from editing without further warning'''. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. <!-- Template:Blatantvandal (serious warning) --> <span style="background-color: #000000"> <font color="white">'''⇒'''</font> <font color="white">]</font> </span> 16:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:09, 17 November 2006
Welcome to Misplaced Pages!!!
|
Personal attacks
With regards to your comments on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Israeli shelling of Beit Hanoun: Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. BhaiSaab 04:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. BhaiSaab 04:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
No personal attacks, thanks
Hellow there. Please cut out the personal attacks. Your contributions history shows you've continued with the attacks on editors AFTER you edited out warnings which show you've at least read them (and also suggests you have some wikipedia experience). Please comment on content not editors. Perhaps this message is wasted on you if you have no intend on establishing yourself as a respected long term editor, but if you do want to make constructive contribution to "the project" you need to refine your style somewhat. , ,
- "POV forking"? - that's rather advanced for a new editor:,
- if that is indeed so, there is a better way to handle it:
- How do you know its "coordinated":
- Yes, obscene language always convinces people that you are correct:
- If you think you are right, why the need for obscenities? :
- Don't blank Discussion pages:
- regards --Merbabu 08:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
The term POV Fork was used many times prior on the talk pages so I looked it up. It is absolutely correct to describe what Striver pulled as bad-faith POV forking. The presence of a high number of muslim editors all showing up at once even when they weren't talking on the other talk pages shows me they're engaging in a coordinated effort to control the article(s).
WP is NOT a democracy. I looked it up: VOTING IS NOT ALLOWED. NotAWeasel 13:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
ANI
FYI--Striver 11:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Blocked for 48 hours
I have blocked you for making some rather ugly comments to other editors, as well as attacking other editor's religious beliefs in your edit summaries and page blankings. If you protest this block simply type {{unblock}} below this message.--MONGO 11:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
NotAWeasel (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
"ugly comments" are a crime? Attacking religious beliefs? Bullshit. And "page blankings"?? I never blanked a page, you liar.
Decline reason:
If you want to be part of the Misplaced Pages community, it means you have to abide by our rules especially Misplaced Pages:Civility. Your latest outburst below only demonstrates that you have anger management issues and that unblocking you now will only lead to further incivility towards others. -- Netsnipe ► 14:23, 14 November 2006 (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 am not a liar. this is a page blank by NotAWeasel: :If you were mistaken/misunderstood that is fine (everyone makes mistakes - me too) but if you are intentionally lying that is not fine. (the fact that you may - or may not - have a point about the deficiency of voting doesn't mean you can blank pages) --Merbabu 14:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages policy specifically says voting is NOT ALLOWED. And I did not "blank" the whole page, I merely removed an ILLEGAL VOTE. NotAWeasel 14:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- In your zeal, you failed to notice that Tewfik (talk · contribs) had already protested along those lines. You should have pointed out meta:Polling is evil and WP:NOT#Misplaced Pages is not a democracy instead of removing other people's comments wholesale. In reviewing your block I discounted this incident entirely, but your incivility remained a sticking point. -- Netsnipe ► 14:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- You also blanked your talk page after I gave you the first "no personal attack" warning. BhaiSaab 16:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- In your zeal, you failed to notice that Tewfik (talk · contribs) had already protested along those lines. You should have pointed out meta:Polling is evil and WP:NOT#Misplaced Pages is not a democracy instead of removing other people's comments wholesale. In reviewing your block I discounted this incident entirely, but your incivility remained a sticking point. -- Netsnipe ► 14:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages policy specifically says voting is NOT ALLOWED. And I did not "blank" the whole page, I merely removed an ILLEGAL VOTE. NotAWeasel 14:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
I love how MONGO's illegal block and bullshit lies are now being used to attack me. Really. Wonderful fucking place you've got here. Should we all just bow down to the pagan altar at Mecca and get it over with please?
- That's an unusual way to request an unblock--Merbabu 14:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Please calm down
I know it is easy to get hotheaded, especially when dealing with contentious editors like the Muslim Guild and other POV pushers. But your behavior crossed the line. I also am fully aware that they love to misconstrue every little thing as a personal attack or "breach of civility", but it doesn't do you much good to get mad about it.
I am going to request Netsnipe reduce your block as per the blocking policy since it is clearly out of step with the guidelines, but please do calm down and be more civil. RunedChozo 17:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Also: I'm not going to remove your comments from your own talk page (that would be incivil) but it might be nice of you to remove some of these comments that others see as inflammatory and perhaps post an apology for exploding like that. RunedChozo 17:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
please stay away from personal attacks and use of obscene word directed at your fellow editor. Thank you. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 14:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Muslim Guild POV-pushers trying to get original article deleted to protect their POV Fork
Striver's POV-pushing cohort User:Burgas00 has, in a fit of his POV-pushing zeal, nominated Beit_Hanoun_November_2006_incident for deletion here. The cowardly bad faith POV-pusher wouldn't even sign his own name to the deletion request either. I thought you should be warned of this. RunedChozo 22:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)