| Revision as of 06:33, 25 December 2008 editSmashville (talk | contribs)10,619 edits →either way: declined as abuse of process← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 21:40, 15 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (24 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| ⚫ | == Protected == | ||
| ⚫ | <div class="user-block"> ] |
||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content.|decline= (all you did on this one was add "the...beam" which does not solve a fact tag) . That's 5 reverts. 5 is more than 3. Thus, 3RR was violated. — ]] 05:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)}} | |||
| :Read what I posted . What you believe is incorrect. The reverts can be on different content within the same article. It does not have to be the same edit each time, ] (]) 05:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | I have protected your talk page as you are clearly abusing the unblock process by merely copying and pasting the same rationale despite being shown where you have violated 3RR. Also, ] is very clear that the reverts do not have to be to the same content. --]] 06:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :: Again by your view anyone to make more then 3 changes to an article will be blocked. Give me a break. that is the point of Misplaced Pages, to fix and edit articles. NONE of the edits made were a edit war of the same content which is what the 3RR rule is about. It don't matter when the 24 hrs is up I will go back and change the "narration" back to Spiel which is what it is called by Disney. as for the other uses of "narration" I will change them too as they are incorrect as well. and i will be filing yet another report on your harassing me. ] (]) 05:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Please join and discuss it on the talk page of the article before just reverting it. As for "harassing" you, I'm not sure how I've been harassing you. I gave you a warning, you disputed the warning, quite adamantly (to the point of borderline incivility), so I tried explaining to you several times what you were doing wrong. You then reverted my edits, so I reported you, that's not harassment. You also inappropriately archived active discussions. I wasn't harassing, I was fixing things that you just happened to be involved with, ] (]) 05:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::: |
:::: Whatever. You know damn well I did not violate the 3RR rule. but whatever either way had NO BUSINESS even sticking their nose in the monorail article. But yet they kept on harassing me until they convinced other s that I was a danger and got me blocked. This it to either way and the other so called moderators that came in harassed me on the 24th of Dec. DO NOT TALK TO ME, DO NOT LEAVE MESSAGES IN MY TALK PAGE. I WILL NOT READ THEM AND I WILL DELETE THEM. If you have something to say. go tell it to your little group of friends. ] (]) 22:00, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == |
== Blocked == | ||
| Knotslanding, you have been warned by several administrators that your behaviour is not acceptable (cf. , and ). Despite this ''clear'' warnings, you started edit warring immediately after your block on the same article again (). In addition to that, your are clearly violating ]: , . This behaviour (edit warring and incivility) can not be tolerated. Thus, I am going to block you for 3 days. If you continue behaving like this in the future, this ''will'' result in an indefinite block. — <small><b><span style="border:1px solid #20406F;padding:1px 3px;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">]</span></b></small> <span style="color: #999;">//</span> ] 22:50, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| :Oh Bull. This is crap and I am going to file a report on you as well for this. I have done NOTHING wrong and you know it. What the heck are you either ways little pimp when they go around harassing people, you step in and block the person for fighting back? I will be making phone calls about this. You both are abuse of power. ] (]) 22:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :: In 3 days I WILL come back and RE FIX the incorrect information in the article. ] (]) 22:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :::Sorry, but that is not the case. As has been stated before ''HeadMouse'', your ] are not welcome here. --] (]) 23:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: Must be nice to think you know everything. But I hate to break it to you. I am not "head mouse". It seems to me that ANYONE that comes into the article and puts in valid information and tried to keep it there is assumed to be "head mouse" without any positive proof or evidence. Other then the fact that both persons have fought to keep the article correct, you have nothing linking me to them. Wait, I know whats going to happen now. your going to claim that you have done a trace on the computes and that we both use that same computer. Well again I hate to break it to you, but i have been on 3 different computers that past week. So that excuse won't work. You are wrong and you know it. What are you going to do to the next poor person that comes in trying to fix the article. you going to ban them too and say they are head mouse? You really need to grow up and get over yourself. ] (]) 23:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Good bye == | ||
| ⚫ | <div class="user-block"> ] You have been '''blocked indefinitely''' from editing in accordance with ] for {{#if:|'''{{{reason}}}'''|repeated ]}}. If you believe this block is unjustified you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{#if:y|] (]) 23:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)|}}</div><!-- Template:uw-block3 --> | ||
| You cannot request I be blocked for something I have not even done. According to you the 3RR is if a change is made in a 24 hr time frame/ if I am blocked for 24 hrs then any change i make after that time is new and does not fall under the 3RR. STOP HARASSING ME!!! ] (]) 05:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :You're threatening to be disruptive after your block expires. Threats of disruption often lead to block extensions. The point of a block is not to punish, but, instead to prevent. So if you're threatening to disrupt, a block can be extended to prevent it from occurring, ] (]) 05:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :: |
||
| ⚫ | EXCUSE ME???? Sock puppet???? I don't think so. REMOVE THIS NOW!! ] (]) 23:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=This block is unjustified. None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content.|decline=You have clearly violated ], and at the least, have been engaging in ]. Your heated dialogue above gives little hope that you plan to reform your editing methodologies, and gives further credit to that. Note that by actually engaging in ] or ] post block does not favor well in your favor. — <small>] | ] | ]</small> 06:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)}} | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|I AM NOT A SOCK PUPPET OF ANYONE. THIS BLOCK NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.|decline=Uh, no. And the legal threat below is noteworthy. <small>] | ] | ]</small> 23:14, 26 December 2008 (UTC)}} | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=This block is unjustified. None of the changes were in violation of the 3RR rule. this is all harassment from Either Way. All the "reverts" listed by them are ALL different edits to different parts of the article. It was not a edit war on the same content.|decline=You have posted the same rationale three times. It has been explained to you twice that you are incorrect. You did in fact break 3RR. I provided you with the diffs. Talk page is protected for the duration of the block due to abuse of the unblock process. — ]] 06:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)}} | |||
| I will be making phone calls about this Monday morning. ] (]) 23:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Is that a legal threat as well? --]] 23:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| The EDITS were not REVERTS and they were not all on the same content. Jesus Christ. if no one can make more then 3 separate edits to an article in one day then Misplaced Pages would not function. I could understand if there were 5 edits to the SAME CONTENT, but it was not.] (]) 06:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Did I say I was calling an lawyer??? Jesus Christ you people try to start trouble don't you. I will be calling Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 23:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == Protected == | ||
| ⚫ | I have protected your talk page as you are clearly abusing the unblock process by merely copying and pasting the same rationale despite being shown where you have violated 3RR. Also, ] is very clear that the reverts do not have to be to the same content. --]] 06:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=I AM NOT A SOCK PUPPET. THIS ACCUSATION IS IN VALID WITH NO PROOF. THIS BLOCK IN UNJUST AS WELL.|decline=You just happen to have the same incivility and SPA attitude on the same article as HeadMouse. Plus, your incivility and continued edit warring and above notice that you would not stop edit warring are enough in and of themselves to block you indefinitely. — ]] 23:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)}} | |||
| :::: So because there is more then one person in the world that wants to see this article with correct information, then they MUST all be the same person. Until you have proof that I am a sock puppet then this block in unjust. ] (]) 23:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=There has been no proof or evidence shown that I am a sock puppet. Until such proof or evidence is provide, this block in unjust.|decline=Even without that, you all but say you have every intention to continue edit warring. Sorry, we don't need this here. Talk page protected.— ]] 01:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)}} | |||
Latest revision as of 21:40, 15 February 2023
 Archives |
Protected
I have protected your talk page as you are clearly abusing the unblock process by merely copying and pasting the same rationale despite being shown where you have violated 3RR. Also, WP:3RR is very clear that the reverts do not have to be to the same content. --Smashville 06:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- Whatever. You know damn well I did not violate the 3RR rule. but whatever either way had NO BUSINESS even sticking their nose in the monorail article. But yet they kept on harassing me until they convinced other s that I was a danger and got me blocked. This it to either way and the other so called moderators that came in harassed me on the 24th of Dec. DO NOT TALK TO ME, DO NOT LEAVE MESSAGES IN MY TALK PAGE. I WILL NOT READ THEM AND I WILL DELETE THEM. If you have something to say. go tell it to your little group of friends. Knotslanding (talk) 22:00, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Blocked
Knotslanding, you have been warned by several administrators that your behaviour is not acceptable (cf. , and ). Despite this clear warnings, you started edit warring immediately after your block on the same article again (). In addition to that, your are clearly violating WP:CIVIL: , . This behaviour (edit warring and incivility) can not be tolerated. Thus, I am going to block you for 3 days. If you continue behaving like this in the future, this will result in an indefinite block. — Aitias // discussion 22:50, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- Oh Bull. This is crap and I am going to file a report on you as well for this. I have done NOTHING wrong and you know it. What the heck are you either ways little pimp when they go around harassing people, you step in and block the person for fighting back? I will be making phone calls about this. You both are abuse of power. Knotslanding (talk) 22:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- In 3 days I WILL come back and RE FIX the incorrect information in the article. Knotslanding (talk) 22:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but that is not the case. As has been stated before HeadMouse, your sockpuppets are not welcome here. --Kralizec! (talk) 23:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- Must be nice to think you know everything. But I hate to break it to you. I am not "head mouse". It seems to me that ANYONE that comes into the article and puts in valid information and tried to keep it there is assumed to be "head mouse" without any positive proof or evidence. Other then the fact that both persons have fought to keep the article correct, you have nothing linking me to them. Wait, I know whats going to happen now. your going to claim that you have done a trace on the computes and that we both use that same computer. Well again I hate to break it to you, but i have been on 3 different computers that past week. So that excuse won't work. You are wrong and you know it. What are you going to do to the next poor person that comes in trying to fix the article. you going to ban them too and say they are head mouse? You really need to grow up and get over yourself. Knotslanding (talk) 23:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Good bye
EXCUSE ME???? Sock puppet???? I don't think so. REMOVE THIS NOW!! Knotslanding (talk) 23:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Knotslanding (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I AM NOT A SOCK PUPPET OF ANYONE. THIS BLOCK NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.
Decline reason:
Uh, no. And the legal threat below is noteworthy. seicer | talk | contribs 23:14, 26 December 2008 (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 will be making phone calls about this Monday morning. Knotslanding (talk) 23:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- Is that a legal threat as well? --Smashville 23:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Did I say I was calling an lawyer??? Jesus Christ you people try to start trouble don't you. I will be calling Misplaced Pages. Knotslanding (talk) 23:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Knotslanding (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I AM NOT A SOCK PUPPET. THIS ACCUSATION IS IN VALID WITH NO PROOF. THIS BLOCK IN UNJUST AS WELL.
Decline reason:
You just happen to have the same incivility and SPA attitude on the same article as HeadMouse. Plus, your incivility and continued edit warring and above notice that you would not stop edit warring are enough in and of themselves to block you indefinitely. — Smashville 23:25, 26 December 2008 (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.
- So because there is more then one person in the world that wants to see this article with correct information, then they MUST all be the same person. Until you have proof that I am a sock puppet then this block in unjust. Knotslanding (talk) 23:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Knotslanding (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
There has been no proof or evidence shown that I am a sock puppet. Until such proof or evidence is provide, this block in unjust.
Decline reason:
Even without that, you all but say you have every intention to continue edit warring. Sorry, we don't need this here. Talk page protected.— Blueboy96 01:14, 27 December 2008 (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.