Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Girth Summit _(blether) 22:48, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kitchen Knife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This block is purely vindictive by User:Girth Summit Kitchen Knife (talk) 22:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have provided no reason to think so. Yamla (talk) 23:02, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

Some advice: what you need to do, if you want to edit here, is to read WP:NPA. Like, really read it, and take it to heart. You don't get a free pass on personal attacks because you disagree with the other guy. Or because you think the other guy is a nationalist. Or even if you think the other guy is a clearcut asshole. This is the third time this year you have been blocked for the same thing, and you still don't get it: you cannot make personal attacks, period. I don't know what animus you think I have against you to make you think I would block you vindictively, but I assure you that there is none. I'll even say this, for the benefit of the reviewing admin: if any subsequent unblock request gives you confidence that this user understands our NPA policy, and is willing to abide by it, then feel free to unblock without consulting me. Girth Summit _(blether) 23:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will add this, you were blocked 10 YEARS ago multiple times for the same behavior. Enough is enough. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kitchen Knife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This block is purely vindictive by User:Girth Summit, he really hasn't given a good reason for the block, hasn't said what the personal abuse is or articulated his thinking. He had a bee in his bonnet for some time, after first agree with some additions I'd made were useful and then quickly changing his mind when some other Mods disagreed. That rationale they used was spurious, and he just seem to decide which way the wind was blowing and follow that. I'm not sure anyone with a User name which references genitals should make comments about people's behaviour. His interpretation of NPA is perverse and is more a prevention of any form of criticism. As for the claim of Boomerang, that is just nonsense. In Girth's view all someone has to do is make a threat to report someone and they are then proof against being reported.Kitchen Knife (talk)

Decline reason:

Again, this is a pattern going back 10 YEARS. This didn't just happen overnight. Talk page access removed. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:17, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

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'll add, for posterity, that my username has nothing whatsoever to do with genitals. Most people seem to be fine with it, but every now and again someone suggests something along these lines. The question was raised at my RfA, and I created this page in response. I have no interest in making, or discussing, infantile innuendos. Girth Summit _(blether) 23:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good block. This user is incapable of collaborative editing. The problematic edits came immediately after a week long block for the very same behaviour. Polyamorph (talk) 02:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beetroot cake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beetroot cake until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

BaduFerreira (talk) 04:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]