User talk:Altetendekrabbe

Islamic-Jewish Relations Dispute

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Islamic-Jewish Relations". Thank you. 67.247.19.21 (talk) 22:11, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Use of WP:COATRACK as an argument

Hello. Your edit here caught my attention. You removed the support section but left criticism, using WP:COATRACK as the argument in your edit summary. You assume that collecting supporting views for the site is coatrack, but not colleting criticism. I ask you to reconsider your stance. Both views are important for achieving neutral point of view. --Pudeo' 20:47, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Ankh.Morpork 10:05, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Pork pov

how now thinks your my sock he needs to be stopped :/ Spacech45 (talk) 15:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

lol! let the porky make a fool out of himself. i also suspect that he is infact a sockpuppet. follow his edits, and note the right-wing idiots who supports him.-- altetendekrabbe  15:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Malik Shabazz, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Ankh.Morpork 16:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Please revert your latest attack at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Henrik.karlstrom or I will block you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 16:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Altetendekrabbe. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 16:04, 9 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 day for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 16:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

i am wrongly accused of being a sock of user henrikkarlsrom here [1], and i need to defend myself. clearly the person dunno what he/she is talking about altetendekrabbe 21:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You don't defend yourself from a sockpuppet investigation by making personal attacks on the reporter. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:18, 9 May 2012 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

i have wrongly been accused of being henrikkarlstrom here [2]. i need to defend myself against these false claims.

Decline reason:

You may present your defense here. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 01:06, 10 May 2012 (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.

ok, jpgordon could you please give a 2. opinion by looking into what the checkuser found? i can assure you that i'm not henrikkarlstrom. i have googled up his name and it seems that henrikkarlstrom lives almost 500 km away from me (if you travel by plane in a straight line that is). if you want i can mail you my details, just provide me your e-mail. user benjamil has made some remarks but user "elen of the roads", the user who has wrongly branded me as henrikkarlstrum, remains silent.-- altetendekrabbe  03:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

• I have reviewed the evidence again, and am prepared to undo the sock block, as I now think it is a false positive. However, you will remain blocked until Malik Shabbaz's block expires (in two and a half hours). Also, I must point out that if you continue the behaviour that earned you that block, you are likely to find yourself blocked again, so please moderate your comments to avoid this happening. Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:52, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

ok, thanks.-- altetendekrabbe  17:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Dhimmi, you may be blocked from editing. Ankh.Morpork 13:35, 11 May 2012 (UTC)