User talk:Wikieditorpro

Welcome!

Hello, Wikieditorpro, 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! --Bedivere (talk) 18:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for helping to make a more supporting user environment for us "noobs". You rock! --monochrome_monitor 02:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

Indefinite topic ban from all pages and making any edit broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is suggested that you don't appeal for at least six months.

You have been sanctioned per this AE request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions for that decision. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:00, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

Since reading of the ban issued against me it has been my intention to appeal. However business and family commitments have prevented me from doing so until now. Given the deeply flawed actions of the administrators in implementing this ban, and their disregard for universally accepted norms as demonstrated below, I intend to utilize the Wikipedia appeals process to the maximum extent permitted in order to draw attention to this.

The ban is being appealed because of the flawed process that led to the ban. The administrators failed to adhere to the most fundamental principle of procedural fairness required in any arbitration procedure, and reached a consensus before I had even posted my reply. No respectable arbitration or administrative panel would allow a decision to stand where this principle was violated, irrespective of whether all or only some of those involved in the decision making process violate this principle.

Furthermore it is obvious that not even one administrator made any attempt to critique or even verify the statements that they based their ban on, but rather accepted them uncritically and blindly. While all administrators cited Nishidani's statement, not even one of them noticed the serious distortions by Nishidani, who claimed that I had reverted vandalism per se, when the focus of the revert as evidenced by the edit summary was to revert two highly controversial changes for which he did not seek or obtain consensus.

Further evidence that the administrators neglected to follow basic standards is that none of them noticed the distortions by pluto2012 and the fact that his statement was not related to ARPBIA, as well as the failure of all administrators to notice the egregious violations of Wikipedia rules by those who made statements, including the the egregious personal attacks against myself by the aforementioned user.

The failure by Wikipedia's administrators to abide by universally accepted norms raises serious questions about Wikipedia's procedures that need to be addressed. Wikieditorpro (talk) 16:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

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=Since reading of the ban issued against me it has been my intention to appeal. However business and family commitments have prevented me from doing so until now. Given the deeply flawed actions of the administrators in implementing this ban, and their disregard for universally accepted norms as demonstrated below, I intend to utilize the Wikipedia appeals process to the maximum extent permitted in order to draw attention to this. The ban is being appealed because of the flawed process that led to the ban. The administrators failed to adhere to the most [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_alteram_partem fundamental principle] of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_justice procedural fairness] required in any arbitration procedure, and reached a consensus before I had even posted my reply. No respectable arbitration or administrative panel would allow a decision to stand where this principle was violated, irrespective of whether all or only some of those involved in the decision making process violate this principle. Furthermore it is obvious that not even one administrator made any attempt to critique or even verify the statements that they based their ban on, but rather accepted them uncritically and blindly. While all administrators cited Nishidani's statement, not even one of them noticed the serious distortions by Nishidani, who claimed that I had reverted vandalism per se, when the focus of the revert as evidenced by the edit summary was to revert two highly controversial changes for which he did not seek or obtain consensus. Further evidence that the administrators neglected to follow basic standards is that none of them noticed the distortions by pluto2012 and the fact that his statement was not related to ARPBIA, as well as the failure of all administrators to notice the egregious violations of Wikipedia rules by those who made statements, including the the egregious personal attacks against myself by the aforementioned user. The failure by Wikipedia's administrators to abide by universally accepted norms raises serious questions about Wikipedia's procedures that need to be addressed. [[User:Wikieditorpro|Wikieditorpro]] ([[User talk:Wikieditorpro#top|talk]]) 16:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC) |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=Since reading of the ban issued against me it has been my intention to appeal. However business and family commitments have prevented me from doing so until now. Given the deeply flawed actions of the administrators in implementing this ban, and their disregard for universally accepted norms as demonstrated below, I intend to utilize the Wikipedia appeals process to the maximum extent permitted in order to draw attention to this. The ban is being appealed because of the flawed process that led to the ban. The administrators failed to adhere to the most [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_alteram_partem fundamental principle] of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_justice procedural fairness] required in any arbitration procedure, and reached a consensus before I had even posted my reply. No respectable arbitration or administrative panel would allow a decision to stand where this principle was violated, irrespective of whether all or only some of those involved in the decision making process violate this principle. Furthermore it is obvious that not even one administrator made any attempt to critique or even verify the statements that they based their ban on, but rather accepted them uncritically and blindly. While all administrators cited Nishidani's statement, not even one of them noticed the serious distortions by Nishidani, who claimed that I had reverted vandalism per se, when the focus of the revert as evidenced by the edit summary was to revert two highly controversial changes for which he did not seek or obtain consensus. Further evidence that the administrators neglected to follow basic standards is that none of them noticed the distortions by pluto2012 and the fact that his statement was not related to ARPBIA, as well as the failure of all administrators to notice the egregious violations of Wikipedia rules by those who made statements, including the the egregious personal attacks against myself by the aforementioned user. The failure by Wikipedia's administrators to abide by universally accepted norms raises serious questions about Wikipedia's procedures that need to be addressed. [[User:Wikieditorpro|Wikieditorpro]] ([[User talk:Wikieditorpro#top|talk]]) 16:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC) |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=Since reading of the ban issued against me it has been my intention to appeal. However business and family commitments have prevented me from doing so until now. Given the deeply flawed actions of the administrators in implementing this ban, and their disregard for universally accepted norms as demonstrated below, I intend to utilize the Wikipedia appeals process to the maximum extent permitted in order to draw attention to this. The ban is being appealed because of the flawed process that led to the ban. The administrators failed to adhere to the most [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_alteram_partem fundamental principle] of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_justice procedural fairness] required in any arbitration procedure, and reached a consensus before I had even posted my reply. No respectable arbitration or administrative panel would allow a decision to stand where this principle was violated, irrespective of whether all or only some of those involved in the decision making process violate this principle. Furthermore it is obvious that not even one administrator made any attempt to critique or even verify the statements that they based their ban on, but rather accepted them uncritically and blindly. While all administrators cited Nishidani's statement, not even one of them noticed the serious distortions by Nishidani, who claimed that I had reverted vandalism per se, when the focus of the revert as evidenced by the edit summary was to revert two highly controversial changes for which he did not seek or obtain consensus. Further evidence that the administrators neglected to follow basic standards is that none of them noticed the distortions by pluto2012 and the fact that his statement was not related to ARPBIA, as well as the failure of all administrators to notice the egregious violations of Wikipedia rules by those who made statements, including the the egregious personal attacks against myself by the aforementioned user. The failure by Wikipedia's administrators to abide by universally accepted norms raises serious questions about Wikipedia's procedures that need to be addressed. [[User:Wikieditorpro|Wikieditorpro]] ([[User talk:Wikieditorpro#top|talk]]) 16:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}