| Revision as of 21:42, 22 February 2008 editKim Dent-Brown (talk | contribs)10,635 edits →Richbold, Count of Breisgau: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:43, 22 February 2008 edit undoAltenmann (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers218,352 editsm Reverted edits by Kim Dent-Brown (talk) to last version by MikkalaiNext edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| *P.P.S. "Normal service" will be resumed when the poisonous atmosphere of witch hunting, militant paranoia, kangaroo courts, and wikilawyering in wikipedia will disperse. My pledge did not change my overall respect to the project. I simply no longer want to endanger my editing activities by trigger-happy idiots endorsed by polite formalists. `']] 20:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC) | *P.P.S. "Normal service" will be resumed when the poisonous atmosphere of witch hunting, militant paranoia, kangaroo courts, and wikilawyering in wikipedia will disperse. My pledge did not change my overall respect to the project. I simply no longer want to endanger my editing activities by trigger-happy idiots endorsed by polite formalists. `']] 20:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :: Can't disagree. The endless querulousness of POV-pushers who have learned how to game the system is a big problem. As a matter of interest, what was the original locus of this particular blow-up? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | :: Can't disagree. The endless querulousness of POV-pushers who have learned how to game the system is a big problem. As a matter of interest, what was the original locus of this particular blow-up? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 10:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi there, I've declined the speedy tag you applied here. While you're quite right that the article doesn't yet contain an explicit assertion of notability, a quick Google search on the name immediately shows that (a) he's real and (b) he's notable. Keep an eye on the article by all means - I expect the first author will be along to expand it sometime soon. ] ] 21:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:43, 22 February 2008
Altenmann (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
This is outrageous. I demand stipping the blocking admin from his admin rights.
Decline reason:
Your block may or may not be invalid but you need to provide a reason to believe it is invalid. — Yamla (talk) 19:22, 21 February 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.
If Mikkalai leaves further unblock requests, please note that this decline was based solely on lack of reason given to lift the block. It may also be worth seeing the thread on WP:ANI. I expect that Mikkalai will indeed leave another unblock request and the fact that I declined one here should then be absolutely irrelevant. --Yamla (talk) 19:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
{{unblock|A certain user went lenghts accusing me of various sins I did not commit while liberally using the word "ass". I pointed to him that this word is highly offensive in other cultures literally saying that "in some cultures you may have your throat cut". It is craziness to look for innuendos on each occasion. I deeply loathe the current atmosphere in wikipedia of thick wikilawyering multiplied by paranoia. In a modern civilized society when someone feels offended it is customary to request an apology or for explanations rather than to call to a barrier or to shoot safely from around a corner. This drive for civility had made some wikibrains seriously twisted.}}
|
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
Request handled by: Maxim(talk) 23:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
Solemn pledge of muteness
Since wikipedia is full of sickos happy to jump to conclusions, and since the adminship is infested with trigger-happy cowboys and wikilawyers, I hereby pledge to not engage in any communication in wikipedia whatsoever.
Signed and dated: `'Míkka>t 19:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- P.S. And no I will never stop beating my wife. `'Míkka>t 19:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- P.P.S. "Normal service" will be resumed when the poisonous atmosphere of witch hunting, militant paranoia, kangaroo courts, and wikilawyering in wikipedia will disperse. My pledge did not change my overall respect to the project. I simply no longer want to endanger my editing activities by trigger-happy idiots endorsed by polite formalists. `'Míkka>t 20:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Can't disagree. The endless querulousness of POV-pushers who have learned how to game the system is a big problem. As a matter of interest, what was the original locus of this particular blow-up? Guy (Help!) 10:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)