User talk:Olawe

Aloha

Aloha

Regarding your query from the state terrorism page. I think the reason may be that since the article is semi-protected, any accounts editing it (even those with names) have to be older than 4 days. You may have clearance to edit the talk page of that article only. Is the "Olawe" account less than 4 days old?BernardL (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as the logs show, the "Olawe" account was created on the 10th (UTC). So, Olawe, you could wait a few days, and you'll be able to edit semi-protected articles like this. Or you could make suggestions on the article talk page, and if they're good, the old hands will follow them. :) — the Sidhekin (talk) 21:07, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I created my account only about 2 days ago. Does this mean I can edit in two days henceforth? I do not quite understand the reason for the "semi-protection." From what I read the action was maybe was not right? But thank you for explaining it to me. Much appreicated.Olawe (talk) 21:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course, most wiki pages are not semi protected. There is no need to wait in order to contribute to wiki. You are obviously not obsessed with only one topic and undoubtedly would be interested in contributing elsewhere. And I'm sure you'll find it more interesting to contriube in your own words rather than merely reverting to someone elses version... William M. Connolley (talk) 21:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Olawe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! William M. Connolley (talk) 21:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You appear to be an SPA that exists for no reason other than reverting Allegations... This isn't helpful. I've temporarily blocked you. Please find a broader spectrum of interests, or at least some original content to contribute, when you block expires William M. Connolley (talk) 06:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Why did you block me? What is SPA? You have reverted many times, sir. I reverted one time. I find you are very petty man to block me and have no discussion about the problem. That is very bad. Who make you the dictator? I think you block me only because you are edit warring and AI am not on your side. That is very desperate of you to have block me and then do another revert. You never explain or talk to anyone. I think you are a big bully. No good reason to block me when I am helping to make the article better. That is why you also don't want me to edit on this article: only because I do not agree with you. I will report you to others.Olawe (talk) 07:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

This is not right. Mr. Connolley is a hypocrite to tell me to find orginal content to contribute when he never does that. The only thing he does is to revert to other people on the article. I only disagree with him and make a revert but also explain on the discussion page. But Mr. Connolley bullies anyone who does not agree with him. I only made one revert and I use the discussion page to help the article. I do not know of any rule that I broke. Many editors seem care more about each other instead of the article. For example, they only revert because of who made the change and not what the change was. That is stupid. I only care about what makes the article better. Mr. Connolley rudeness is a big shame. He is not helpful. I think it is very very wrong for him to block me only because I disagree with him. Blocking others is the only way he can win his stupid war with others that he hates on the article. Very stupid. This bullying is very abusive when he blocks me for no good reason. Someone please see what he is doing. How can someone like him be an administrator? Wikipedia is supposed to be more open and democratic. I am new and I know what he is doing is very wrong.

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=This is not right. Mr. Connolley is a hypocrite to tell me to find orginal content to contribute when he never does that. The only thing he does is to revert to other people on the article. I only disagree with him and make a revert but also explain on the discussion page. But Mr. Connolley bullies anyone who does not agree with him. I only made one revert and I use the discussion page to help the article. I do not know of any rule that I broke. Many editors seem care more about each other instead of the article. For example, they only revert because of ''who'' made the change and not what the change was. That is stupid. I only care about what makes the article better. Mr. Connolley rudeness is a big shame. He is not helpful. I think it is very very wrong for him to block me only because I disagree with him. Blocking others is the only way he can win his stupid war with others that he hates on the article. Very stupid. This bullying is very abusive when he blocks me for no good reason. Someone please see what he is doing. How can someone like him be an administrator? Wikipedia is supposed to be more open and democratic. I am new and I know what he is doing is very wrong. |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=This is not right. Mr. Connolley is a hypocrite to tell me to find orginal content to contribute when he never does that. The only thing he does is to revert to other people on the article. I only disagree with him and make a revert but also explain on the discussion page. But Mr. Connolley bullies anyone who does not agree with him. I only made one revert and I use the discussion page to help the article. I do not know of any rule that I broke. Many editors seem care more about each other instead of the article. For example, they only revert because of ''who'' made the change and not what the change was. That is stupid. I only care about what makes the article better. Mr. Connolley rudeness is a big shame. He is not helpful. I think it is very very wrong for him to block me only because I disagree with him. Blocking others is the only way he can win his stupid war with others that he hates on the article. Very stupid. This bullying is very abusive when he blocks me for no good reason. Someone please see what he is doing. How can someone like him be an administrator? Wikipedia is supposed to be more open and democratic. I am new and I know what he is doing is very wrong. |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=This is not right. Mr. Connolley is a hypocrite to tell me to find orginal content to contribute when he never does that. The only thing he does is to revert to other people on the article. I only disagree with him and make a revert but also explain on the discussion page. But Mr. Connolley bullies anyone who does not agree with him. I only made one revert and I use the discussion page to help the article. I do not know of any rule that I broke. Many editors seem care more about each other instead of the article. For example, they only revert because of ''who'' made the change and not what the change was. That is stupid. I only care about what makes the article better. Mr. Connolley rudeness is a big shame. He is not helpful. I think it is very very wrong for him to block me only because I disagree with him. Blocking others is the only way he can win his stupid war with others that he hates on the article. Very stupid. This bullying is very abusive when he blocks me for no good reason. Someone please see what he is doing. How can someone like him be an administrator? Wikipedia is supposed to be more open and democratic. I am new and I know what he is doing is very wrong. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}