Revision as of 11:19, 14 March 2009 editAxmann8 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,292 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:23, 14 March 2009 edit undoAxmann8 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,292 edits ←Replaced content with '<font face="Times New Roman"> ---- ==<u>The date is</u>: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br><br>Please put your signature on additions to …'Next edit → | ||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
==<u>The date is</u>: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br><br>Please put your signature on additions to this page.== | ==<u>The date is</u>: {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}<br><br>Please put your signature on additions to this page.== | ||
---- | ---- | ||
{{unblock reviewed|1=Your edits were blatantly ] and tendentious. You were launching accusations around; that's not a discussion, that's soapboxing. As such, I'm declining this request, and urge you to be more neutral and wary when you edit controversial articles, after the block expires. Failure to do so will inevitably result in a longer block. Thanks, <font face="Arial"> ] (])</font> 09:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)}} | |||
{{unblock reviewed|'''I wish to appeal this block directly to the arbitration committee. I have tried<br><br>other''' '''methods of contesting this block (see below), but I am still dissatisfied with<br><br>the''' '''administrator conduct in this case. I am requesting respectful administrator<br><br>assistance''' '''to help me file this request, as I am unable to start an arbitration<br><br>request on my own.'''<br><br> | |||
Also, per ], ], and ].|decline=Requests where a user is appealing a block or a ban to the Arbitration Committee must be done via email, as the user in question naturally is in no position to engage the arbitration process. See ] for more details on contacting the Committee. ] (]) 08:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)<br><small>Note: I removed a large amount of unnecessary and nonsensical formatting from this request.</small>}} | |||
{{unblock reviewed|1=Accusations revoked on grounds that no evidence exists to uphold them. Also, I agree to stay away from the Obama article, as the only addition I wish to add (about the eligibility concern) is obviously not going to be accepted, I really have no place there anyway. <font face="Old English Text MT" size="3px" bgcolor="black"><span style="background-color: black;">] ]</span></font> 11:19, 14 March 2009 (UTC)|decline=Your edits to the talk page violate ] and ]. Making wild conspiratorial accusations, and labeling living people using names like "domestic terrorist" without any cause or justification is clearly a violation of ]. Polite discussion is encouraged at talk pages, even on the issue of Obama's citizenship, but the sort of polemic you left at the Barak Obama is clearly disruptive. It does not appear you are interested in building consensus via evidence or anything else, but you merely want to demand that your version of The Truth be accepted regardless of what mainstream publications and neutral sources say on the matter.}} | |||
== Unblock offer == | |||
The highly charged political articles of the day require a certain mindset and an ability to bring light rather than heat to the discussion. These articles require higher standards of editors, and administrators are tasked to enforce civility and decorum on the discussion as well as resolving problematic article edits. There is no right to free speech on wikipedia: If Misplaced Pages administration is not to your liking, you are free to copy all the contents and set up an alternative site - this is your one and only right guaranteed by free culture projects such as this. Despite that, I am, however, willing to unblock you, provided you give me your word to stay away from Barack Obama related topics for the original duration of your block and withdraw your accusations against Fut.Perf. above. <strong>]<small>•]</small></strong> 10:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::Thank you. I accept this request. As soon as I am unblocked, I will withdraw my accusation against Fut.Perf. on the grounds that there is no substantive evidence or reason to uphold the accusation. <font face="Old English Text MT" size="3px" bgcolor="black"><span style="background-color: black;">] ]</span></font> 11:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:23, 14 March 2009