| Revision as of 03:13, 24 October 2008 editSgeine (talk | contribs)170 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:27, 24 October 2008 edit undoSgeine (talk | contribs)170 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{unblock|The original block was not in accordance with wikipedia policy on vandalism. The admin claimed vandalism where none was present and has presented no proof of vandalism. The admin did not assume good faith on the part of the editor and is clearly to personally involved to offer an objective policy based opinion. This appears to be more of an effort to silence debate than enforce actual policy. These extremely heavy handed tactics appear to be a consistent trait with this admin based on their talk page and history and should also be addressed in another forum. I would like this issue of blocking addressed by a neutral and objective third party other than Shell Kinney. This issue started when i requested to have a page removed in accordance with policy. Instead of addressing that issue the administrator chose instead to go in circles that were clearly more personal for her than based purely on policy as I repeatedly requested.}} | {{unblock|The original block was not in accordance with wikipedia policy on vandalism. The admin claimed vandalism where none was present and has presented no proof of vandalism. The admin did not assume good faith on the part of the editor and is clearly to personally involved to offer an objective policy based opinion. To view what she cited as vandalism it can be viewed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Helio_(wireless_carrier)&oldid=228979775#Helio_Security_Incidents In fact, she reverted it repeatedly before i could even finish writing it or including sources as you can see in the history of the time. This appears to be more of an effort to silence debate than enforce actual policy. These extremely heavy handed tactics appear to be a consistent trait with this admin based on their talk page and history and should also be addressed in another forum. I would like this issue of blocking addressed by a neutral and objective third party other than Shell Kinney. This issue started when i requested to have a page removed in accordance with policy. Instead of addressing that issue the administrator chose instead to go in circles that were clearly more personal for her than based purely on policy as I repeatedly requested.}} | ||
Revision as of 03:27, 24 October 2008
Sgeine (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Please provide a reason as to why you should be unblocked.Change
{{unblock}} to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}