User talk:Hibbledy-hobbledy

July 2019[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Jimbo Wales. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:18, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of UK Conservative Party "Anti-Semitism" Disinformation Campaign Against Jeremy Corbyn[edit]

A tag has been placed on UK Conservative Party "Anti-Semitism" Disinformation Campaign Against Jeremy Corbyn requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Would move to draft without a redirect, but its a copy of the current draft

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 (talk) 03:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have prior warnings for disruptive editing on this page. If you want to be unblocked you need to promise not to post serious accusations against other editors without supporting diffs. You also need to avoid naming an editor who evidently prefers to remain anonymous. Let me know if you agree to these terms. Jehochman ^Talk 04:56, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jehochman The person who published that text remians at large, and the Signpost article was approved by numerous members in high standing. I've been reading about he case and thought the information was of great significance to the commntiy. A[pologies if certain lines were crossed. I will tred more carefully ion future yuo have my words.

No apology needed. I’m going to guess that I’m more lenient than the arbs. I’ll unblock you. Email them anything you like. Yes the truth probably will come out eventually but let it happen through arbitration or off wiki press. Don’t break the rules here. Jehochman ^Talk 05:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

Jehochman a question if you will, what is the apporpriate venue to post a formal request for WMF Board resingations and to demand Trust & Saftety depot reforms?

I don’t know. Some place on meta? They won’t pay attention unless you get it published in a major newspaper. What irritates me is that T&S has real cases of bad people doing cross wiki threats that T&S should work on. Instead, they’re faffing around with political problems like Fram cussing at ArbCom or pissing off a self-important Wikimedia chapter official. Jehochman ^Talk 10:27, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jehochman, and yes, I largely agree. It's surely now beyond doubt that the T&S team aren't dealing with blatantly obvious and dangerous cases (from what I read at a certain WP criticism site), even when the user in question has been delivered to them on a silver platter, all neatly wrapped up with a bow; frankly, they appear to be incredibly incapable, incontrovertibly incompetent, and (dare I say it) incautiously incestuous. You may not like the site, but for a telling example, I urge you to read the latest blog post from Wikiocracy, "Trust & Safety?". Most of the WMF are frighteneingly ill-suited for their roles, and, as I believe the old adage goes, Fish-heads roll downhill.

ps. It'd be nice to see something published in a major newspaper; I'm not sure how to go about that, maybe it'd be best coming from your goodself? (Given their recent history with WP, I wonder if the UK's DailyMail would be interested?) Cheers. Hibbledy-hobbledy (talk) 11:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Past accounts[edit]

Have you ever edited Wikipedia before creating this account, and would you discuss the usernames you used before this one? Welcome to Wikipedia. AGK ■ 13:33, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:AGK. I ceased editing Wikipedia a number of years ago after being severally gang-harassed (albeit not sexually (I think)) by a small yet stubborn clique of "greasy polers". The current harassment-related hoo hah rather set my antennae aquiver, hence my re-emergence. Hibbledy-hobbledy (talk) 13:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

— Berean Hunter (talk) 20:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:2019 UK Conservative Party "Anti-Semitism" Disinformation Campaign Against Jeremy Corbyn[edit]

Please do not introduce inappropriate pages, such as Draft:2019 UK Conservative Party "Anti-Semitism" Disinformation Campaign Against Jeremy Corbyn, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 20:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]