User talk:VengeancePrime

Wikipedia's banning policy states that "Any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves. As the banned user is not authorized to make those edits, there is no need to discuss them prior to reversion."

1. Can someone please explain WHAT is going on?

2. Can someone show or tell me how all this is determined?

3. Can someone fix it too? I'm not sure what all that is about.

{{subst:User:VengeancePrime/Signature}}

Unblock

1. Looking at Wikipedia:Appealing a block it reads: "If your account has been blocked by mistake, it will be reactivated very quickly, as soon as you let an administrator know of the problem. Otherwise, there is a rapid appeal process which obtains quick review by other independent administrators, and brief discussion of the matter."
2. Something I didn't know is in the second section: "Do you use an ISP or web accelerator that involves shared IPs? Common examples include AOL, Comcast, StarHub, schools, colleges, or Google Web Accelerator." I have used Comcast, various government or government-connected computers, and an airport. That I can think of offhand. (for that matter, I'm editing on a public wireless right now!)
3. Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks finally gave a template to use. Here it is:

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).

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

---

Request reason:

here's my Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks #I'll be brief. #I'm calm. I'm almost numb. Dumbfounded is the best word for it. #What is wrong about my block: there's no need, reason, or even justification to me about it. I'm not sure what it's about. The box says "This user is indefinitely blocked for disruptive editing of pedophilia related topics" but I don't know that I have any pedophilia-related topics in my edit contributions. I have heard terms like "off-wiki" and "second checkuser" and can't find anywhere where I have come up in a negative way. In fact, everyone with whom I've worked seems to get along with me very well, even those that initially didn't. So I'm confused, and nobody is giving me answers. #Addressing the block reason: This page says "sockpuppet" and the userpage gives a specific user with the same initials. (as a side note, I hate using initials...sounds like I'm trying to run with Obama.) A cursory glance at that user's edit history doesn't seem to show many if any articles on which we've both worked. For that matter, not even in the same fields that I can see. #Evidence: (Guilty until proved innocent? Whatever.) Again, contribution histories. What few editss I did see were usually sweeping and I'm mostly a copyeditor. Didn't ever see him bring an article for deletion, while I make it a sport. Don't know what really to put here. Oh yeah, edit summaries... I'm succinct (to a fault) and he is very detailed in most of them (just looking at contributions list). #Don't behave like you think lawyers do: I hope I haven't. #Threaten legal action? How pathetic.

Decline reason:

Declined, you and the banned user VigilancePrime share an IP address, have a similar name, and have both edited pedophilia related topics. This is good enough evidence to apply an indefinite block. Please direct further appeals to the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. — MBisanz ^talk 02:04, 17 August 2008 (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.

Take 2

(And IIRC, this is supposed to reviewed by an UNINVOLVED admin. The one who deleted all my userpages within minutes of this block would not be "uninvolved".)

Per the instruction above: "If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read our guide to appealing blocks first and use the {{unblock}} template again"

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I have read the page, and incorporated it into my original request. Here's what I have against the decline reason:

1. As I read, that can be for using the same ISP, hotel, airport, Starbucks, whatever. I've probably been on two dozen public IPs in the last month.
2. A similar name? I could point out others with similar names.
3. Pedophilia topic? What pedophilia topic have I edited?

I'm confused. None of the above seem like reason for anything more than an inquiry. Isn't that what a talk page is for?

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I have read the page, and incorporated it into my original request. Here's what I have against the decline reason: #As I read, that can be for using the same ISP, hotel, airport, Starbucks, whatever. I've probably been on two dozen public IPs in the last month. #A similar name? I could point out others with similar names. #Pedophilia topic? What pedophilia topic have I edited? :I'm confused. None of the above seem like reason for anything more than an inquiry. Isn't that what a talk page is for? |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I have read the page, and incorporated it into my original request. Here's what I have against the decline reason: #As I read, that can be for using the same ISP, hotel, airport, Starbucks, whatever. I've probably been on two dozen public IPs in the last month. #A similar name? I could point out others with similar names. #Pedophilia topic? What pedophilia topic have I edited? :I'm confused. None of the above seem like reason for anything more than an inquiry. Isn't that what a talk page is for? |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I have read the page, and incorporated it into my original request. Here's what I have against the decline reason: #As I read, that can be for using the same ISP, hotel, airport, Starbucks, whatever. I've probably been on two dozen public IPs in the last month. #A similar name? I could point out others with similar names. #Pedophilia topic? What pedophilia topic have I edited? :I'm confused. None of the above seem like reason for anything more than an inquiry. Isn't that what a talk page is for? |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}