User talk:Brian Boru is awesome: Difference between revisions
Comment |
Indenting posts: It may be easier not to but it is required by Wikipedia policy. |
||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
{{unblock|reason=I won't edit war and abuse editing}} |
{{unblock|reason=I won't edit war and abuse editing}} |
||
*'''Comment''' - For one thing, this unblock request doesn't address the rampant sockpuppetry and disruptive editing that continued ''after'' you were indefinitely blocked, nor does it demonstrate that you understand why you were blocked in the first place, or that this behavior won't continue if you are unblocked. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 00:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' - For one thing, this unblock request doesn't address the rampant sockpuppetry and disruptive editing that continued ''after'' you were indefinitely blocked, nor does it demonstrate that you understand why you were blocked in the first place, or that this behavior won't continue if you are unblocked. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 00:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
I'm wondering why you're commenting now.[[User:Brian Boru is awesome|Brian Boru is awesome]] ([[User talk:Brian Boru is awesome#top|talk]]) 00:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
I'm wondering why you're commenting now.[[User:Brian Boru is awesome|Brian Boru is awesome]] ([[User talk:Brian Boru is awesome#top|talk]]) 00:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
:Because I'm concerned that the reasons for your block (and the sockpuppetry that continued after the block) will continue. You haven't shown that you understand the reasons for your block, and when that's brought up your response is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brian_Boru_is_awesome&diff=673228080&oldid=673227977 this comment]. That kind of response doesn't indicate your willingness to contribute to a collaborative editing environment. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 12:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
:Because I'm concerned that the reasons for your block (and the sockpuppetry that continued after the block) will continue. You haven't shown that you understand the reasons for your block, and when that's brought up your response is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brian_Boru_is_awesome&diff=673228080&oldid=673227977 this comment]. That kind of response doesn't indicate your willingness to contribute to a collaborative editing environment. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 12:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
So you don't trust me[[User:Brian Boru is awesome|Brian Boru is awesome]] ([[User talk:Brian Boru is awesome#top|talk]]) 12:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
So you don't trust me[[User:Brian Boru is awesome|Brian Boru is awesome]] ([[User talk:Brian Boru is awesome#top|talk]]) 12:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
:Your unblock request does not indicate that your behavior will change. Please read [[WP:THREAD]]; the IP editor above explained the use of colons to indent lines, to show that you're responding to a specific comment. Is there a specific reason you're not indenting your responses? - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 12:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
:Your unblock request does not indicate that your behavior will change. Please read [[WP:THREAD]]; the IP editor above explained the use of colons to indent lines, to show that you're responding to a specific comment. Is there a specific reason you're not indenting your responses? - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 12:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
It's easier not to[[User:Brian Boru is awesome|Brian Boru is awesome]] ([[User talk:Brian Boru is awesome#top|talk]]) 12:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
It's easier not to[[User:Brian Boru is awesome|Brian Boru is awesome]] ([[User talk:Brian Boru is awesome#top|talk]]) 12:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
||
{{Comment}} I had told this editor that his appeal wouldn't go very far when it read "I won't use sockpuppets or block evasion" because based on the block log entries, this editor was never blocked for evasion, but rather was blocked for large accounts of disruptive editing, and then was reblocked for spamming another editor's inbox. However, based on what [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] has said here, it seems that this editor has indeed been blocked for socking as well. Also, an appeal won't go through unless the editor can ''prove'', not just claim that his/her block-worthy behaviors will stop. Sorry for not catching this earlier, but because this appeal is only one claim, it still will be declined in its current state. [[Special:Contributions/216.246.149.185|216.246.149.185]] ([[User talk:216.246.149.185|talk]]) 12:54, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
{{Comment}} I had told this editor that his appeal wouldn't go very far when it read "I won't use sockpuppets or block evasion" because based on the block log entries, this editor was never blocked for evasion, but rather was blocked for large accounts of disruptive editing, and then was reblocked for spamming another editor's inbox. However, based on what [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] has said here, it seems that this editor has indeed been blocked for socking as well. Also, an appeal won't go through unless the editor can ''prove'', not just claim that his/her block-worthy behaviors will stop. Sorry for not catching this earlier, but because this appeal is only one claim, it still will be declined in its current state. [[Special:Contributions/216.246.149.185|216.246.149.185]] ([[User talk:216.246.149.185|talk]]) 12:54, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:57, 27 July 2015
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. m.o.p 19:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting
New England Wikimedia General Meeting | ||
---|---|---|
The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future!
| ||
|
| |
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England! |
Message delivered by Dominic at 09:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.
You're invited: Ada Lovelace, STEM women edit-a-thon at Harvard
U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited! | |
---|---|
Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC) |
2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting
You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 10:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Brian Boru is awesome (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I've felt that I have paid my duesBrian Boru is awesome (talk) 20:12, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
What went wrong leading to your block? Also, what edits do you want to make now? PhilKnight (talk) 20:18, 25 July 2015 (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.
That I would like to edit comic book articles. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 20:19, 25 July 2015 (UTC) And that I was revert happy.Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Brian Boru is awesome (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was revert happy
Decline reason:
That does not even begin to address the reasons for the block. I suggest that you try taking the very good advice offered by the anonymous editor below. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2015 (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.
Comment: Hello. Even though I am not an administrator and don't have an account, I am an expierenced editor. I am telling you now that your request "I was revert happy", doesn't address the reason for your block and it will most likely be declined for this reason. I would recommend reading the policy page that I have linked to you here and then changing your appeal to make it more effective. Remember, you can edit your appeal template while it is pending review. Best wishes, 216.246.149.185 (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- Experienced? You've only been here for a day.no offense. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 22:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Brian Boru is awesome: My IP address has changed because I have moved locations, but I have been editing Wikipedia for a long time. I do mean what I've said above though. Your request will most likely be declined in its current state. Just letting you know. Also, please indent replys to posts by adding colons : to the beginning of each reply line. Each reply should have one more colon than the post before it. 216.246.149.185 (talk) 23:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea.Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 20:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Brian Boru is awesome (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
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=I won't edit war and abuse editing |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=I won't edit war and abuse editing |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=I won't edit war and abuse editing |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
- Comment - For one thing, this unblock request doesn't address the rampant sockpuppetry and disruptive editing that continued after you were indefinitely blocked, nor does it demonstrate that you understand why you were blocked in the first place, or that this behavior won't continue if you are unblocked. - Aoidh (talk) 00:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm wondering why you're commenting now. Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 00:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Because I'm concerned that the reasons for your block (and the sockpuppetry that continued after the block) will continue. You haven't shown that you understand the reasons for your block, and when that's brought up your response is this comment. That kind of response doesn't indicate your willingness to contribute to a collaborative editing environment. - Aoidh (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- So you don't trust me Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 12:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Your unblock request does not indicate that your behavior will change. Please read WP:THREAD; the IP editor above explained the use of colons to indent lines, to show that you're responding to a specific comment. Is there a specific reason you're not indenting your responses? - Aoidh (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- It's easier not to Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 12:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Your unblock request does not indicate that your behavior will change. Please read WP:THREAD; the IP editor above explained the use of colons to indent lines, to show that you're responding to a specific comment. Is there a specific reason you're not indenting your responses? - Aoidh (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- So you don't trust me Brian Boru is awesome (talk) 12:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Because I'm concerned that the reasons for your block (and the sockpuppetry that continued after the block) will continue. You haven't shown that you understand the reasons for your block, and when that's brought up your response is this comment. That kind of response doesn't indicate your willingness to contribute to a collaborative editing environment. - Aoidh (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Comment: I had told this editor that his appeal wouldn't go very far when it read "I won't use sockpuppets or block evasion" because based on the block log entries, this editor was never blocked for evasion, but rather was blocked for large accounts of disruptive editing, and then was reblocked for spamming another editor's inbox. However, based on what Aoidh has said here, it seems that this editor has indeed been blocked for socking as well. Also, an appeal won't go through unless the editor can prove, not just claim that his/her block-worthy behaviors will stop. Sorry for not catching this earlier, but because this appeal is only one claim, it still will be declined in its current state. 216.246.149.185 (talk) 12:54, 27 July 2015 (UTC)