Jump to content

User talk:Rlest

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rlest (talk | contribs) at 12:37, 31 July 2007 (Link to IRC). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

information Note: An IP address decided to decline this request but I reverted oviosuly because its administrator usage only, just so you people know ;-) Rlest 16:32, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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).

Rlest (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I'm truly sorry for my actions, the person who called Miranda a b**** and Kurt Weber an idiot on his talk page was not me, it was a Molag Bal sockpuppet as he intentionally makes things worse for me (i.e. As Qst when he made it look like it was me posting abusive unblock requests and writing things like "Qst is innocent") - I know its hard to believe but its true, I unfortunately did call Kurt an idiot on a users RfA and for this I' sorry. I will be taking a short Wikibreak to get things sorted out and I would like to apologise to Miranda, I know my actions were wrong and I would like to say sorry to Miranda and Kmweber before I leave on a Wikibreak, so please unblock so I can attempt to make peace and return and act in a civil manner like I always was as Tellyaddict; thank you for your time :-). The IP behind the

Decline reason:

You seem to have retired, so I see no reason to unblock this account. « ANIMUM » 16:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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.

In addition, the complaints of incivility are just as valid now as before. You have apologised, but you still need to sit out your block. Martinp23 16:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please don't revert it when an admin rejects your request. Martinp23 16:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please, I removed that unblock request as it had been declined and there was an existing one and I didn't want to make it look like I'd posted two, I just want to make peace and if you wont unblock me (which I wouldn't blame you for) would you please leave a note on Kmweber and Miranda's talk page if I write it out here? Rlest 16:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I won't unblock this account, for I think it would be best to undergo its tenure instead. « ANIMUM » 16:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You only get one chance, exceptionally two, at unblock requests here. It seems that you've gone over that limit now, so please don't post additional unblock requests. Also, I can't post messages elsewhere for you, because that would be tantamount to meatpuppetry. Thanks. Martinp23 16:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I only originally posted one, see the page history but when Magnus Animum declined it a second one appeared which I did not post, Animum said she'd post this to their talk pages.

Could you please add the following to Miranda's talk page:
==Apologies== Miranda, my account has understandably not be unblocked so I have asked administrators to post this message. I would like to apologise for my insulting of you under this account, I have calmed down and although we dont get along, I think it would be best if you and me in a kind way keep our distances, I would also like to tell you that the IP address in which you tagged as a sockpuppet of Qst (me) is not true, it was banned user Molag Bal causing trouble for me as he did throughout that mess as Qst. Anyway I ask you to find it in your heart to forgive me and remove that tag as I know you thought it was me I can assure you it wasn't. I hope you accept my apologies and if you want to remove this message; you may. Rlest 17:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please add the following to Kmweber's talk page:
==Apologies== Kurt, I asked administrators to post this as I have understandably not been unblocked. I'm here to apologise for my calling you an idiot under this account. Although I (and in the kindest possible way everybody else on Wikipedia) strongly dis-agree with your reasons to oppose users just because they're self noms has become out of control. I would also like you to know that the IP address what called you an idiot on your talk page was not me, rather banned user Molag Bal who causes immense trouble for me on Wikipedia and did throughout the incident when I edited as Qst. i hope you accept my apologies, I also hope you find it in your heart to stop this opposing requests for adminship based solely on it being a self nomination, Best Regards. Rlest 17:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sign them, and I'll add them for you. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, Rlest 17:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I said that you'd made more than one unblock request, I was also referring to your request of yesterday, which I rejected. Martinp23 17:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
yes but that was when I was annoyed, 24hrs have since passed. I would love to be unblocked and if I make one edit out of line you can indef block me. Rlest 17:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note to Ryan Postlethwaite: I have found someone you maybe looking for, User:RJASE1 is now User:Videmus Omnia. Rlest 17:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a message for Boricuaeddie in response to his ANI comment yes I have been uncivil but you have not been through what I have at Wikipedia, you haven't been falsely tagged as a sockpuppet and had every single editor except for one or two turn their back on you have you? You have no idea how that feels and for people to block you, I thought I had calmed down, I stuck up for you when Nick called you a pillock just before but if I wasn't blocked I would remove that comment where I said Leave Eddie alone as you well.....with the greatest of respect to you....deserved it. Kindest Regards; Rlest 11:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Sigh* Well, I haven't been tagged, but I have been accused of being a sockpuppet twice, and I know it's not a great feeling. But that doesn't give you an excuse to attack fellow editors in the manner that you did. "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Jesus said that. Listen to him. I said I'm wiling to give you another chance, but I sincerely hope that you learn to calm down and ignore comments, as you are very valuable to this community. Also, nobody deserves being called a "pillock", whatever that is, even if they've earned it (which I don't think I have). I barely understand American English, how am I supposed to understand British English? --Boricuaeddie 14:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I'm not the only one who thinks you should be banned. --Boricuaeddie 15:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'm sorry for that but I dont think a ban is in order, Miranda who originally proposed it had page deleted so I dont think it will come to anything, when my block expires on Saturday I'm going to apologise in person to Miranda and Kmweber then go on a break for a few weeks to calm down and get things into prespective on whether I shall return or not, I know creating multiple accounts is not the answer, I'll see I dont know yet....Rlest 15:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for the barnstar. I think, reading your talk page, I must have missed something significant... All the best, The Rambling Man 11:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi, Rlest, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy UCP 04:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hello. You said at my editor review that I should get involved at DYK. I got my first one, and I hope I'll have many more (articles that appear on the Main Page) :-) --Boricuaeddie 04:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]