User talk:Cptchipjew
Cptchipjew (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
It's 2010 and I've been banned far too l. This is cruel and unusual epunishment!
Decline reason:
I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. TNXMan 23:50, 22 January 2010 (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.
Cptchipjew (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I want to start contributing to a number of troubled articles. See Kibera for an example of an article needing cleanup. Plus, this ban was put into place a long time ago, and for something that I didn't even do (though of course I can't really prove that now and don't expect you to believe it)
Decline reason:
I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Please note that further abuse of this template will result in removal of your talk page access. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:57, 23 January 2010 (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.
Cptchipjew (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
As can be read below, I gave a full explanation as to why I should be unblocked (I want to edit specific articles for spelling/grammar), and yet I still get the same boilerplate response. I've been banned for 3.5 years. This nonsense has gone on long enough.
Decline reason:
Having read the above, I see nothing that remotely addresses the reasons for your block, and thus it's quite clear why you remain blocked. You were blocked for both trolling and sockpuppetry - please show me where you even came close to addressing those behaviours, as per the guide to appealing blocks. While you're at it, try to even come close to explaining not only this, but the fact that you felt so compelled to harass another user by continually re-adding it to their userpage (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:39, 4 May 2010 (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.
May 2010[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Cptchipjew, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ message • changes) 23:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Cptchipjew (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So kids, this is the Wikipedia of today...
The story so far:
About 3 and a half years ago I voted to delete on a VfD for an article about some no-name blogger that very few people had heard of. The idea was pretty simple. The article was clearly written by the subject, and there was no encyclopedia merit to it whatsoever. Members of the GNAA also involved themselves in this particular VfD, as they were on some sort of trolling-campaign to get blogger related articles deleted from Wikipedia. On the 29th of November, 2006, a Wikipedia admin by the name of Tawker decided to go on a rampage and ban a bunch of the people that voted to delete. Why? Because if the GNAA was involved, it was surely just a big troll and sockpuppet brigade. Forget about the fact that the article was ultimately deleted for the very reason the VfD was created. Apparently, if a troll is involved, nobody is willing to listen, and an administrator carpetbomb ensues. I liken this behavior by the Wikipedia admins to the following: * Country X bombing the bejeesus out of Country Y, killing numerous civilians because one member of Country Y shot one member of Country X. * Some non-existent legal system where the burden of proof somehow falls on the accused, not the accuser. Although I've attempted to get myself unblocked 3 or 4 times, each time it is rejected. Of course, the admins choosing to reject the unblock have no idea why the original block was put into place, nor are they going to expend any effort to try to find out why. Now unblock me, or just revise this change, or reject the request, and prove to the world what you've become.
Decline reason:
Decline per WP:NOTTHEM. You still haven't addressed the issue of your block, which is your trolling and harassment. Your only reply is 'LOL', That doesn't indicate you'd be a helpful contributor to the project. If you still feel this block is unfair, you may appeal to ARBCOM Q T C 00:15, 5 May 2010 (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.
Cptchipjew (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
How is my explanation above not sufficient? As stated before, I was banned merely for voting along with a trolling group. It was misunderstood as sock-puppetry. Calling it harassment is just silly.
Decline reason:
You are not blocked for that. As you show no sign of understanding the reason for your block, your access to this page is removed. Tim Song (talk) 02:39, 5 May 2010 (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.
Orphaned non-free image File:Steelydan-twoagainstnature.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Steelydan-twoagainstnature.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)