| Revision as of 19:30, 21 February 2008 editAltenmann (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers218,415 editsm →Solemn pledge of muteness← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:31, 21 February 2008 edit undoAltenmann (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers218,415 edits →Solemn pledge of mutenessNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| ==Solemn pledge of muteness== | ==Solemn pledge of muteness== | ||
| '''Since wikipedia is full of sickos happy to jump |
'''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: `']] 19:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC) | Signed and dated: `']] 19:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 19:31, 21 February 2008
| “ | I believe that any study which would question and deconstruct rather than defend, excuse or accuse various institutions is worth the effort. | ” |
| — Irina Livezeanu
| ||
|
Article content is to be discussed in article talk pages. (You may invite me there if you find my input important). Any wikiLawyering messages will be reverted on sight. Any messages written by yourself about yourself will be respectfully considered. |
Interested in your thoughts on the humor theory merge you reverted. Clearly you went to a lot of work to develop the publication list (and did a great job!). I want to understand what stops you from wanting to merge it with a general article on the topic? B. Mistler 00:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC) We can discuss in Talk:Humor_theory_(general)#Publication_List_Merger_proposal
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)
Block
I have no involvement in the general situation. But no, you do not make aggressive references to throats being cut when talking to other editors. I realize it's serious when an admin blocks an admin, and I have never done so; but this is something else. If you're agitated about something in real life, maybe you need to log off for a few hours, or maybe there's someone you could ping to talk to. Excepting real life upset accidentally spilling over, I can think of no acceptable excuse for posts of this sort. Marskell (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I strongly endorse. Had I been the first across the threatening remark I doubt I would have been as subtle. Ronnotel (talk) 19:25, 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)