PhilKnight (talk | contribs) m clarify |
→March 2015: promised response |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
[[User:Swamiblue|Swamiblue]] ([[User talk:Swamiblue#top|talk]]) 04:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)|decline=Firstly, in regard to the edit warring, it seems you have been edit warring to some extent. Secondly, using multiple IPs to edit can be grounds to block someone, and I'd suggest taking greater care to only edit logged in from now on. Thirdly, by your own admission you have made personal attacks. Overall, I'm declining this request to be unblocked. [[User:PhilKnight|PhilKnight]] ([[User talk:PhilKnight|talk]]) 12:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)}} |
[[User:Swamiblue|Swamiblue]] ([[User talk:Swamiblue#top|talk]]) 04:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)|decline=Firstly, in regard to the edit warring, it seems you have been edit warring to some extent. Secondly, using multiple IPs to edit can be grounds to block someone, and I'd suggest taking greater care to only edit logged in from now on. Thirdly, by your own admission you have made personal attacks. Overall, I'm declining this request to be unblocked. [[User:PhilKnight|PhilKnight]] ([[User talk:PhilKnight|talk]]) 12:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)}} |
||
*I won't be able to address any of your statements until tomorrow at the earliest. Just letting you know that.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 05:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
*I won't be able to address any of your statements until tomorrow at the earliest. Just letting you know that.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 05:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
||
:Okay no problem [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]]. A day or two off will help things cool down. I also wanted to apologize to [[User:Anthony Bradbury]]. He was the admin that gave me a true second chance and I don't want to let him down. I have not socked in any way, edited only using valid sources and apologized for personal attacks. I know this is not a permanent block and I hope that it never comes to that again but the length affects the ability to continue to the talk page discussions and work on other articles. |
::Okay no problem [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]]. A day or two off will help things cool down. I also wanted to apologize to [[User:Anthony Bradbury]]. He was the admin that gave me a true second chance and I don't want to let him down. I have not socked in any way, edited only using valid sources and apologized for personal attacks. I know this is not a permanent block and I hope that it never comes to that again but the length affects the ability to continue to the talk page discussions and work on other articles. |
||
:::I see in the interim that Phil declined your unblock request, but I promised you a response. You need to look at this from a different perspective. You're not an ordinary editor. You're a user who was indefinitely blocked for socking on a relatively large scale, and that included using IPs to edit. You were given a second chance, but there's only so much [[WP:ROPE]] given to an editor with your history. For you to say that you forgot to log in when editing more recently with multiple IPs is not an acceptable explanation. First, every time an IP edits an article, they are warned that their IP address may be disclosed by editing. I'm sure you are familiar with that, so at that point you should stop and log in, but you didn't. Second, it wasn't just one time with one IP address. It was multiple times with multiple addresses. |
|||
:::With respect to the edit warring, you knew very well that editing the article while the current dispute was still ongoing was not permissible, but you did it anyway, and to wikilawyer your way out of it by saying it wasn't exactly the same as the other material, etc., doesn't justify it. |
|||
:::Finally, as for the personal attacks, this is not a new issue. Your accusing others of bias because they don't agree with you has been commented on before, by me and by other users. Persisting in that conduct constitutes personal attacks, even if it's followed by an apology because the apology rings hollow when it's repetitive conduct.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 22:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:49, 31 March 2015
Welcome
Welcome to my talk page. Please be respectful. Have had issues in the past and now I am unblocked. My expertise and general interest is with controversial topics within Hinduism.
Swamiblue (talk) 04:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Stop making further personal attacks
Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. I would request you to stop your personal attacks a third time now. You have been actively making personal attacks to editors. If you continue your behavior, you may run the risk of being reported to an administrator. Here are the latest notable diffs (I haven't included the old attacks) : (diff one, diff two, and diff 3 where you accuse me of having a leash around User:Bbb23). I would politely request you to cease from making personal attacks otherwise I will be forced to report you. Your cooperation in this matter would be highly appreciated. Thanks Kapil.xerox (talk) 03:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- I would like to make amends for some of those comments. I can see how someone can interpret those words as off putting. Unfortunately, I was frustrated with the blatant conflict of interest and assumed ownership of articles based on the editing patterns on BAPS and related articles. I did warn you on your talk page so maybe reading some of those policies might help. Hopefully we can resolve our issues and you can observe how I expand the article regarding the court proceedings and legal separation while removing the biases. Thanks Swamiblue (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
March 2015
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 04:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Swamiblue (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
You have blocked me for three reasons and I want to address them all. I have not made any reverts at the Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha after your warning, only discussed the points on the talk page and made edits that were not in contention. I waited for days for comments regarding the parts that I edited and no one responded. I only recently revert when seconds after you blocked me because user:kapil.xerox reverted my edits not a revision. I have listened to all your comments and asked you for help when it was needed. I also changed my attitude after learning that you were to reason when I was initially very frustrated. You can see that from our discussion.
Using multipe IPS to edits is not a valid reason to block me. Once my main unblock occurred and confession to all the mistakes, I never used multiple accounts or tried to hide my self. The only time that may have had multiple IP's is when I forgot to log-in. I don't understand how this is a violation?
Lastly, I apologized to that user for personal attacks that I made multiple times. I told him that I believe he has a conflict of interest and cannot be partial in a discussion. I can remove anything that is deemed a personal attack. I feel that a month is a long time to be blocked and I have improved my editing by recently helping cleaning many articles and adding valid points to the discussions. Please consider allowing me to improving my abilities to discuss topics and continue to be a positive user on this resource.
Swamiblue (talk) 04:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Firstly, in regard to the edit warring, it seems you have been edit warring to some extent. Secondly, using multiple IPs to edit can be grounds to block someone, and I'd suggest taking greater care to only edit logged in from now on. Thirdly, by your own admission you have made personal attacks. Overall, I'm declining this request to be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 12:24, 31 March 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.
- I won't be able to address any of your statements until tomorrow at the earliest. Just letting you know that.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- Okay no problem Bbb23. A day or two off will help things cool down. I also wanted to apologize to User:Anthony Bradbury. He was the admin that gave me a true second chance and I don't want to let him down. I have not socked in any way, edited only using valid sources and apologized for personal attacks. I know this is not a permanent block and I hope that it never comes to that again but the length affects the ability to continue to the talk page discussions and work on other articles.
- I see in the interim that Phil declined your unblock request, but I promised you a response. You need to look at this from a different perspective. You're not an ordinary editor. You're a user who was indefinitely blocked for socking on a relatively large scale, and that included using IPs to edit. You were given a second chance, but there's only so much WP:ROPE given to an editor with your history. For you to say that you forgot to log in when editing more recently with multiple IPs is not an acceptable explanation. First, every time an IP edits an article, they are warned that their IP address may be disclosed by editing. I'm sure you are familiar with that, so at that point you should stop and log in, but you didn't. Second, it wasn't just one time with one IP address. It was multiple times with multiple addresses.
- With respect to the edit warring, you knew very well that editing the article while the current dispute was still ongoing was not permissible, but you did it anyway, and to wikilawyer your way out of it by saying it wasn't exactly the same as the other material, etc., doesn't justify it.
- Finally, as for the personal attacks, this is not a new issue. Your accusing others of bias because they don't agree with you has been commented on before, by me and by other users. Persisting in that conduct constitutes personal attacks, even if it's followed by an apology because the apology rings hollow when it's repetitive conduct.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- Okay no problem Bbb23. A day or two off will help things cool down. I also wanted to apologize to User:Anthony Bradbury. He was the admin that gave me a true second chance and I don't want to let him down. I have not socked in any way, edited only using valid sources and apologized for personal attacks. I know this is not a permanent block and I hope that it never comes to that again but the length affects the ability to continue to the talk page discussions and work on other articles.