| Revision as of 00:54, 7 June 2009 editAllstarecho (talk | contribs)Rollbackers41,096 edits →Not copyvios← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:58, 7 June 2009 edit undoFrank (talk | contribs)Administrators19,998 edits →Blocked: on admin actionsNext edit → | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
| :You're not helping yourself. That unblock was in response to my assertion that this dialogue is not disruptive to the project. Only '''you''' have the ability to make that assertion actually true. If you want to convince uninvolved admins (not ], not me, not ], not ]) that you should be unblocked, you could start ] and join us in the cleanup by posting information here on your talk page. <small><span style="padding:2px;border:1px solid #000000">] {{!}} ]</span></small> 00:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | :You're not helping yourself. That unblock was in response to my assertion that this dialogue is not disruptive to the project. Only '''you''' have the ability to make that assertion actually true. If you want to convince uninvolved admins (not ], not me, not ], not ]) that you should be unblocked, you could start ] and join us in the cleanup by posting information here on your talk page. <small><span style="padding:2px;border:1px solid #000000">] {{!}} ]</span></small> 00:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::My talk page should not have been blocked in the first place specifically for that reason, that I'm not being disruptive on my talk page. An out of the blue admin blocks my talk page for what reason? No explanation or nothing, just does it. That is unacceptable of any admin. '''-''' ]<span class="Unicode" style="color:#FF72E3;">▼</span>'''<sup>]</sup>''' <sub>'''] @'''</sub> 00:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | ::My talk page should not have been blocked in the first place specifically for that reason, that I'm not being disruptive on my talk page. An out of the blue admin blocks my talk page for what reason? No explanation or nothing, just does it. That is unacceptable of any admin. '''-''' ]<span class="Unicode" style="color:#FF72E3;">▼</span>'''<sup>]</sup>''' <sub>'''] @'''</sub> 00:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :::Your past actions and current level of activity here are keeping at '''least''' three admins from doing other stuff. The uninvolved admin may well have judged that to be disruptive in itself. Nevertheless, after a quick word, that admin undid the block. That's not to say someone else won't come along and do it again. At some point, interest in this will all fade away. The question that remains is...when that happens, will you have become a productive, policy-abiding member of Misplaced Pages, or will you be indefinitely blocked, with your talk page protected? <small><span style="padding:2px;border:1px solid #000000">] {{!}} ]</span></small> 00:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:58, 7 June 2009
 | This user has retired - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 03:27, 5 June 2009 (UTC) |
Allstarecho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Per the block statement Anyone may unblock if he promises not to copy and paste copyrighted content into Misplaced Pages anymore, I promise not to copy and paste copyrighted content into Misplaced Pages anymore since I am retired from Misplaced Pages. Additionally, no need in an indef block of a retired user.
Decline reason:
you are not retired from wikipedia, you are quite clearly still here. Viridae 08:58, 6 June 2009 (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.
Allstarecho (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Retirement isn't a condition of my being unblocked. The block reason specifically said Anyone may unblock if he promises not to copy and paste copyrighted content into Misplaced Pages anymore and I specifically promised not to copy and past copyrighted content into Misplaced Pages anymore. I am abiding by the specific statement that said I could be unblocked. So now, unblock me.
Decline reason:
I am declining this one too because it doesn't address the reason why the first one was declined. You stated "I promise not to copy and paste copyrighted content into Misplaced Pages anymore since I am retired from Misplaced Pages", since your promise not to copy copyrighted material into wikipedia hinges on you being retired, and you clearly aren't retired (which is why the first unblock request was declined). Viridae 10:52, 6 June 2009 (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.
Not copyvios
And now Durova is CSDing articles that aren't copyvios or that had the copyvio content removed. Man, y'all are paranoid. Seriously, it looks like I'm not the one that needs to calm down and take a deep breathe. I have witnessed non-copyvio articles and images get deleted as well as images and articles of which I didn't add the copyvio content to, but got blamed for it in the edit/deletion summaries. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Diffs? Frank | talk 00:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Try this one of yourself.. paranoia over a question mark.. if you'll look at the history you'll see where I went over the copyright info after moonwhateverhernameis brought it to my attention Friday. Which brings me to another damn point.. moonwhateverhernameis brought articles to my attention, I worked on them to correct the issues and then the witch-hunt began. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- That's not paranoia...it's a non-encyclopedic sentence that looks very much like it was lifted straight from a DVD sleeve. I don't have immediate access to that title or I would have checked it myself. I've already ordered a book from my library. And yes, I do have a life, believe it or not. Frank | talk 00:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- If you will look at my damn edit to the article you will see I wrote the damn sentence. It's a question so why wouldn't a question have a question mark?? Yes, it is paranoia. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- That's not paranoia...it's a non-encyclopedic sentence that looks very much like it was lifted straight from a DVD sleeve. I don't have immediate access to that title or I would have checked it myself. I've already ordered a book from my library. And yes, I do have a life, believe it or not. Frank | talk 00:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
More to the point...do you have a diff that supports "Durova is CSDing articles that aren't copyvios"? Frank | talk 00:25, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Way to ignore your own paranoia over the question mark. Yes, see Lanier High School (Jackson, Mississippi) and tell me what in that article is now a copyvio. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am ignoring the personal attack and looking into that one. Any others? Frank | talk 00:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- And based on this comment, now people are trying to hide things from me?? - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am ignoring the personal attack and looking into that one. Any others? Frank | talk 00:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Blocked
I have re-blocked you indefinitely for repeated copyright violations in spite of warnings not to in accordance with our copyright policy. That policy notes that "Contributors who repeatedly post copyrighted material despite appropriate warnings may be blocked from editing by any administrator to prevent further problems." I request that any administrators considering unblocking first review the history of this talk and the thread at the administrator's noticeboard for scale of the problem. This block has been applied in the face of significant disruption cross multiple articles and multiple years. I will make note that I have reset your block at the administrator's noticeboard. --Moonriddengirl 00:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- You can't just go and change my block and why I was blocked, after I've already been blocked. That's just WP:POINT and punishment, which blocks are not supposed to be for. You should be desysopped for that move. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:20, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- You've drawn attention to yourself and been combative at every step, and further information has come to light as a result of the intense scrutiny. WP:POINT is about disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a point. Reaffirming your block is not disruptive, it is exactly what blocks are all about - protecting the project. Frank | talk 00:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- She reset my block as retaliation for this to make sure I am never unblocked. Whatever Frank. She should be desysopped immediately. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:25, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have already reported the reblock at WP:ANI, where it will certainly receive plenty of scrutiny. You have taken my actions personally from the beginning, so I am not surprised that you would see this in similar light. --Moonriddengirl 00:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- She reset my block as retaliation for this to make sure I am never unblocked. Whatever Frank. She should be desysopped immediately. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:25, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- You've drawn attention to yourself and been combative at every step, and further information has come to light as a result of the intense scrutiny. WP:POINT is about disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a point. Reaffirming your block is not disruptive, it is exactly what blocks are all about - protecting the project. Frank | talk 00:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
The admin that blocked my talk page should be dealt with as well. That was unacceptable. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- You're not helping yourself. That unblock was in response to my assertion that this dialogue is not disruptive to the project. Only you have the ability to make that assertion actually true. If you want to convince uninvolved admins (not User:Durova, not me, not User:Moonriddengirl, not User:Viridae) that you should be unblocked, you could start here and join us in the cleanup by posting information here on your talk page. Frank | talk 00:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- My talk page should not have been blocked in the first place specifically for that reason, that I'm not being disruptive on my talk page. An out of the blue admin blocks my talk page for what reason? No explanation or nothing, just does it. That is unacceptable of any admin. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Your past actions and current level of activity here are keeping at least three admins from doing other stuff. The uninvolved admin may well have judged that to be disruptive in itself. Nevertheless, after a quick word, that admin undid the block. That's not to say someone else won't come along and do it again. At some point, interest in this will all fade away. The question that remains is...when that happens, will you have become a productive, policy-abiding member of Misplaced Pages, or will you be indefinitely blocked, with your talk page protected? Frank | talk 00:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- My talk page should not have been blocked in the first place specifically for that reason, that I'm not being disruptive on my talk page. An out of the blue admin blocks my talk page for what reason? No explanation or nothing, just does it. That is unacceptable of any admin. - ALLST✰R▼ wuz here @ 00:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)