block reaffirmed now |
Allstarecho (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
:::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. '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]<span class="Unicode" style="color:#FF72E3;">▼</span>'''<sup>[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]</sup>''' <sub>'''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @'''</sub> 00:22, 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. '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]<span class="Unicode" style="color:#FF72E3;">▼</span>'''<sup>[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]</sup>''' <sub>'''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @'''</sub> 00:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
More to the point...do you have a diff that supports "Durova is CSDing articles that aren't copyvios"? <small><span style="padding:2px;border:1px solid #000000">[[User:Frank|<span style="color:cyan;background:blue"> Frank </span>]] {{!}} [[user_talk:Frank|<span style="color:blue;background:cyan"> talk </span>]]</span></small> 00:25, 7 June 2009 (UTC) |
More to the point...do you have a diff that supports "Durova is CSDing articles that aren't copyvios"? <small><span style="padding:2px;border:1px solid #000000">[[User:Frank|<span style="color:cyan;background:blue"> Frank </span>]] {{!}} [[user_talk:Frank|<span style="color:blue;background:cyan"> talk </span>]]</span></small> 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. '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]<span class="Unicode" style="color:#FF72E3;">▼</span>'''<sup>[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]</sup>''' <sub>'''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @'''</sub> 00:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Blocked== |
==Blocked== |
Revision as of 00:27, 7 June 2009
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 Wikipedia anymore, I promise not to copy and paste copyrighted content into Wikipedia anymore since I am retired from Wikipedia. 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. ViridaeTalk 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 Wikipedia anymore and I specifically promised not to copy and past copyrighted content into Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia anymore since I am retired from Wikipedia", 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). ViridaeTalk 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.
Viridae, my retirement is a non-issue as it's not a stipulation that was given in the stipulation for being unblocked. It doesn't matter whether I am retired, not retired, still editing, not editing.. the stipulations say if I promised not to add copyrighted material anymore, I can be unblocked. I promised not to add copyrighted material. I abided by the stipulation given. So now I should be unblocked, period. I'm afraid you not honoring the stipulation as it was set, is bad faith and speaks to other motives of keeping me blocked. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 20:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- In both your unblock requests you promised to not add copyrighted material because you are retired. You aren't retired, you are still here, so the promise doesn't hold any weight. ViridaeTalk 21:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Whether I am retired or not is not the point. I abided by the stipulations that were laid out in the block. What part of "retired or not is not in the stipulations and has nothing to do with whether I am blocked or unblocked" is so hard to understand?? - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 00:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- You could just say "I will not add copyrighted material and will also retire AllstarSoxwon (talk) 00:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I shouldn't have to say that since it's not part of the stipulations for being unblocked. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 00:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think he means that you have implied that as long as you aren't retired you will make Copyright vios, but really I agree, it shouldn't be part of it. Soxwon (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- In fact, it was the only one.
Whether or not that remains the case is an open question. Frank | talk 00:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)However, further information has resulted in the block being reaffirmed (you've already commented on this below). Frank | talk 00:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I shouldn't have to say that since it's not part of the stipulations for being unblocked. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 00:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- You could just say "I will not add copyrighted material and will also retire AllstarSoxwon (talk) 00:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Whether I am retired or not is not the point. I abided by the stipulations that were laid out in the block. What part of "retired or not is not in the stipulations and has nothing to do with whether I am blocked or unblocked" is so hard to understand?? - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 00:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
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▼echo 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▼echo 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)
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▼echo wuz here @ 00:27, 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 (talk) 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▼echo 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 Wikipedia 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)