| Revision as of 23:25, 11 November 2007 editJehochman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers46,275 edits uw-blp3← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 23:35, 26 July 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Removed stale messages from inactive IP talkpage. (Task 13)Tag: AWB | ||
| (57 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Blanked IP talk}} | |||
| {| align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: none; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;" | |||
| |- | |||
| | valign="top" style="padding: 0.1em" | {{tick|40}} | |||
| | style="padding: 0.1em" | | |||
| '''Your request to be unblocked''' has been '''granted''' for the following reason(s): | |||
| <br><br>believe him<span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 03:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ''Request handled by:'' <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 03:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Request accepted (after-block request) --> | |||
| |} | |||
| :You were editing in order to elicit a negative response. Many people would consiter that to be trolling. It's not helpfull to the on-going process of improving the encyclopedia. Please don't do it any more... ---] <small>(]/]/])</small> 22:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::It wasn't my intention to elicit a negative response, but to wryly observe: The reason why participants are having a difficult time with the wording is because they're trying to find a policy which allows their own socks, and those of their friends, while disallowing socks of those they dislike. Some of the participants are themselves sockpuppets. The red lines that are being proposed, such as participating in mainspace, but not project discussions, are just random tangential facts which are being reified as a substitute for what is actually desired: a trusted (by itself) in-group which can use socks freely, and an out-group which can't. The fact that this observation was removed and led to a block only supports this interpretation. Posting under an IP is not "abusive sockpuppetry" when there is no active usernamed account or evasion involved. To suggest that administrators should stop trying to rig the system and follow what they ask of others - or stop asking it - shouldn't be controversial.] 23:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <nowiki>{{unblock|Thanks, Rlevse, for granting my unblock request. However, I'm still blocked.}}</nowiki> | |||
| : ''']''' 05:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes, it is. Thanks,Daniel.] 06:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::For the record (because I have gotten queries about it): I have no opinion on the block or the unblock, or any reblocking that could/may/whatever happen (ie. if you want to reblock this account, don't come to me, but rather {{admin|Rlevse}}). I only unblocked it because an administrator granted the unblock request - see - but forgot to technically unblock the IP (a fact I noted in the block log). ''']''' 08:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Yes, I understand that. I don't see any queries on your talk page, however. Can you point me to them, so I can weigh in on my own behalf?] 08:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::No, because they are confidential in nature and detail. ''']''' 08:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::If they're complicated enough to have a nature and include details, such details are almost certainly wrong. Jehochman's suggestion that ] indicates the level of reliability which may be ascribed to his on-wiki statements; how much less can we ascribe to those hidden from scrutiny.] 08:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::As I said, I care nothing for the intimate details, and have no opinions on the merits of the block, the unblock, or anything further that happens from there (I do not understand the situation enough to have an opinion or a vested interest). My action was merely 'doing the business' that Rlevse initiated above. I have absolutely no intention of being a party to any dispute involving you, Jehochman, El C ''et al''. ''']''' 08:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Biography of living persons== | |||
| {{{icon|] }}}Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did at ]}}. Content of this nature could be regarded as ] and is in violation of ]. If you continue, you '''will''' be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-biog3 --> This includes not only articles, but also talk pages. - ] <sup>]</sup> 23:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 23:35, 26 July 2022
Unregistered editors using this IP address received messages on this talk page years ago. Since users of the IP address have likely changed, these messages have been removed. They can be viewed in the page history.