User talk:Bucksham Co-operative

August 2014[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Acroterion (talk) 03:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh appeal[edit]

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).

Bucksham Co-operative (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The administrator to ban me seems to have rejected my appeal. I was blocked for harassment and vandalism. My original appeal acknowledged the harassment and assured the banning admin that it would not happen again. My original appeal clarified also that I believed my restoration of info to be a revert of mass unexplained blanking. Further discussion with both the blocking admin and one of the editors to involve him/herself in a conflict which was already spurred between another editor and me (i.e, he/she was not coerced into his/her actions) also brought to light that the Stevie May currently stands in a vandalized situation and DWPaul is at this precise moment in time responsible for the vandalism which sits on the page. That however has been ignored, and apart from some ranting from the same editor about how it is okay to revert me and send me templates without explaining the situation whilst I'd be expected to explain myself when fighting what I see to be vandalism, no fresh arguments were produced by either editor that my continuation as editor is a bad thing for Wikipedia. It is now patently obvious that I never intended to vandalize and my first action if unblocked will be to remove the vandalism DWPaul inserted that nobody cares about. In addition, I was cross when I made the stupid page moves which amounted to harassment and I regret that action and that too will not be repeated. The two things which landed me here are acknowledged and I request an unblock with the promise that I will edit constructibely.

Decline reason:

I'm struggling to work out how you think telling blatant lies will get you unblocked. Let's see what your edits to Stevie May have consisted of thus far. Number notwithstanding, you have repeatedly reinserted flagrant vandalism, and blanked sections wholesale for no good reason. You've also called users "interfering twit"s and interfering buffoon for reverting these changes (and moved their userpages too, how charming). So, no. — foxj 17:20, 13 August 2014 (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.