User talk:Handpolk: Difference between revisions
Joseph2302 (talk | contribs) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{unblock reviewed|reason= Reason given for block is almost entirely inaccurate. TheGracefulSlick [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Handpolk&diff=669910210&oldid=669910125 blanked conversation on my talk page with a trolling edit summary], I warned them for this. The Banner [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/The_Banner was edit warring across multiple articles], I warned them for this. Both warnings were warranted and both were heeded. I made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheGracefulSlick&diff=669912007&oldid=669910776 a single revert] of a removal of one of these warnings, which I acknowledge I should not have done and will not do again -- but that is hardly 'edit warring' nor does it merit being blocked. [[User:Handpolk|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#006BB6; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Handpolk</span>]] [[User talk:Handpolk|<span style="color:#FDB927">''¯\_(ツ)_/¯''</span>]] 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)|decline=Overall, I agree with the blocking admin's description of events leading up to your block. In future, if an editor leaves you a message saying that you are giving out too many warnings, don't respond by issuing another warning. [[User:PhilKnight|PhilKnight]] ([[User talk:PhilKnight|talk]]) 18:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)}} |
{{unblock reviewed|reason= Reason given for block is almost entirely inaccurate. TheGracefulSlick [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Handpolk&diff=669910210&oldid=669910125 blanked conversation on my talk page with a trolling edit summary], I warned them for this. The Banner [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/The_Banner was edit warring across multiple articles], I warned them for this. Both warnings were warranted and both were heeded. I made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheGracefulSlick&diff=669912007&oldid=669910776 a single revert] of a removal of one of these warnings, which I acknowledge I should not have done and will not do again -- but that is hardly 'edit warring' nor does it merit being blocked. [[User:Handpolk|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#006BB6; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Handpolk</span>]] [[User talk:Handpolk|<span style="color:#FDB927">''¯\_(ツ)_/¯''</span>]] 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)|decline=Overall, I agree with the blocking admin's description of events leading up to your block. In future, if an editor leaves you a message saying that you are giving out too many warnings, don't respond by issuing another warning. [[User:PhilKnight|PhilKnight]] ([[User talk:PhilKnight|talk]]) 18:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)}} |
||
:[[User:TheGracefulSlick]], I never denied any wrongdoing. I denied being 100% at fault. So far I can't recall anybody placing any blame on anybody else for anything that occurred over the last ~36 hours. Every comment has focused on my actions. And I am not 100% at fault. [[User:Handpolk|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#006BB6; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Handpolk</span>]] [[User talk:Handpolk|<span style="color:#FDB927">''¯\_(ツ)_/¯''</span>]] 05:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:18, 5 July 2015
July 2015
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Bishonen | talk 13:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)Handpolk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Reason given for block is almost entirely inaccurate. TheGracefulSlick blanked conversation on my talk page with a trolling edit summary, I warned them for this. The Banner was edit warring across multiple articles, I warned them for this. Both warnings were warranted and both were heeded. I made a single revert of a removal of one of these warnings, which I acknowledge I should not have done and will not do again -- but that is hardly 'edit warring' nor does it merit being blocked. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Overall, I agree with the blocking admin's description of events leading up to your block. In future, if an editor leaves you a message saying that you are giving out too many warnings, don't respond by issuing another warning. PhilKnight (talk) 18:08, 4 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.
- User:TheGracefulSlick, I never denied any wrongdoing. I denied being 100% at fault. So far I can't recall anybody placing any blame on anybody else for anything that occurred over the last ~36 hours. Every comment has focused on my actions. And I am not 100% at fault. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 05:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)