| Revision as of 09:45, 4 May 2008 editBlechnic (talk | contribs)3,540 edits →Shrew's fiddle: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:48, 4 May 2008 edit undoSam Korn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users22,849 edits decline unblock requestNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="user-block"> ] {{#if:31 hours|You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''48 hours'''|You have been '''temporarily ]''' from editing}} in accordance with ] for {{#if:edit warring at ] after a final warning to stop.|'''Edit warring at ] after a final warning to stop.'''|]}}. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. 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:|''']''' <sup>]</sup> 09:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-block1 --> ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 09:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | <div class="user-block"> ] {{#if:31 hours|You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''48 hours'''|You have been '''temporarily ]''' from editing}} in accordance with ] for {{#if:edit warring at ] after a final warning to stop.|'''Edit warring at ] after a final warning to stop.'''|]}}. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. 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:|''']''' <sup>]</sup> 09:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-block1 --> ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 09:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| {{unblock|This is a lie. I pointed out something very wrong with an article on the main page, and I have been relentlessly attacked for it, my edits reverted, and I've been ganged up on. Now, the knowledgable editors suggest it be merged into stocks, it's not, it's a pillory, and the main page has a quote that is no longer in the article. I get it, though, now. I can't edit because I'm too new, and if I disagree with someone, because I'm new 5 other editors will come in and jump me for any and every reason, and do whatever they want, edit war with me, but only the new editor will be blocked. Still, I see everything I was taken down for originally, the spam, has been removed. I was NOT edit warring at Shrew's fiddle. I questioned the reliability, and I posted my reasons on the talk page and was attacked and ganged up on by established editors who disagreed but offered no evidence or support for their arguments. Then I get blocked for offering evidence. What kind of bs is this? Established editors own Misplaced Pages and its main page?}} | {{unblock reviewed|1=This is a lie. I pointed out something very wrong with an article on the main page, and I have been relentlessly attacked for it, my edits reverted, and I've been ganged up on. Now, the knowledgable editors suggest it be merged into stocks, it's not, it's a pillory, and the main page has a quote that is no longer in the article. I get it, though, now. I can't edit because I'm too new, and if I disagree with someone, because I'm new 5 other editors will come in and jump me for any and every reason, and do whatever they want, edit war with me, but only the new editor will be blocked. Still, I see everything I was taken down for originally, the spam, has been removed. I was NOT edit warring at Shrew's fiddle. I questioned the reliability, and I posted my reasons on the talk page and was attacked and ganged up on by established editors who disagreed but offered no evidence or support for their arguments. Then I get blocked for offering evidence. What kind of bs is this? Established editors own Misplaced Pages and its main page?|decline=You were warned very explicitly that a continuation of your behaviour would result in a block. You continued your behaviour. The block was warranted and reasonable. ] <sup>]</sup> 09:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)}} | ||
| == How many Misplaced Pages editors does it take to gang up on one newbie? == | == How many Misplaced Pages editors does it take to gang up on one newbie? == | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| :::And I'm sure no one really gives a shit about what this is really about, since the crap is still unsourced on the main page. Did you know that the slaves mentioned on the main page aren't in the article anymore, because someone removed all of the sources I said were advertising, because they agreed with me about that. --] (]) 09:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | :::And I'm sure no one really gives a shit about what this is really about, since the crap is still unsourced on the main page. Did you know that the slaves mentioned on the main page aren't in the article anymore, because someone removed all of the sources I said were advertising, because they agreed with me about that. --] (]) 09:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| And then you come along and block me for discussing the article on its talk page. Well, shame on me. --] (]) 09:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | And then you come along and block me for discussing the article on its talk page. Well, shame on me. --] (]) 09:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Why don't people stop discussing the article with me on the fucking talk page, if I'm blocked from editing for discussing the article on its talk page? And administrator Ruylong is certainly enjoying the opportunity to keep going at me while I'm blocked. What bs. --] (]) 09:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:48, 4 May 2008
MBisanz 09:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Blechnic (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
This is a lie. I pointed out something very wrong with an article on the main page, and I have been relentlessly attacked for it, my edits reverted, and I've been ganged up on. Now, the knowledgable editors suggest it be merged into stocks, it's not, it's a pillory, and the main page has a quote that is no longer in the article. I get it, though, now. I can't edit because I'm too new, and if I disagree with someone, because I'm new 5 other editors will come in and jump me for any and every reason, and do whatever they want, edit war with me, but only the new editor will be blocked. Still, I see everything I was taken down for originally, the spam, has been removed. I was NOT edit warring at Shrew's fiddle. I questioned the reliability, and I posted my reasons on the talk page and was attacked and ganged up on by established editors who disagreed but offered no evidence or support for their arguments. Then I get blocked for offering evidence. What kind of bs is this? Established editors own Misplaced Pages and its main page?
Decline reason:
You were warned very explicitly that a continuation of your behaviour would result in a block. You continued your behaviour. The block was warranted and reasonable. Sam Korn 09:48, 4 May 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.
How many Misplaced Pages editors does it take to gang up on one newbie?
As many as possible. And no rules apply to newbies, just take them down. If they quote policy, block them. --Blechnic (talk) 09:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't change your message or anyone's message, but thanks for the threat, what are you going to do if I repeatedly do what I didn't do? Now I know, don't stop edit warring, because you'll be blocked for continuing, and then do change someone's message so they can rightfully accuse you of it?
Exactly how much more of this crap is going to go on? What a waste of a good idea. --Blechnic (talk) 09:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- This edit changed my message. Don't do it again. MBisanz 09:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Changed your message? It was an edit conflict, so I just pasted in my stuff from the bottom. Oh, yeah, I changed 48 to 31 and End to end, precisely as you originally posted it--sure, sure, that's right. And I gained so much by that lower case e that you changed, now everyone will think, what? So pillory me, or stockade me, or flog me. Good god, now I've heard all the "I'm your daddy cries." --Blechnic (talk) 09:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- And I'm sure no one really gives a shit about what this is really about, since the crap is still unsourced on the main page. Did you know that the slaves mentioned on the main page aren't in the article anymore, because someone removed all of the sources I said were advertising, because they agreed with me about that. --Blechnic (talk) 09:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Changed your message? It was an edit conflict, so I just pasted in my stuff from the bottom. Oh, yeah, I changed 48 to 31 and End to end, precisely as you originally posted it--sure, sure, that's right. And I gained so much by that lower case e that you changed, now everyone will think, what? So pillory me, or stockade me, or flog me. Good god, now I've heard all the "I'm your daddy cries." --Blechnic (talk) 09:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
And then you come along and block me for discussing the article on its talk page. Well, shame on me. --Blechnic (talk) 09:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)