User talk:Geir Smith

Blocked

ok, at this point I am indefinitely banning you from editing English Wikipedia, on grounds of disruptive behaviour, inserting patent nonsense to article space, and consistent off-site canvassing and calls for vandalism, combined with positive slander.[1] Feel free to apply for review of this block. dab (𒁳) 09:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like apply for unblocking of this account. Thanks. Geir Smith (talk) 23:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have on idea who has started saying I use several accounts. In all events this is not true and may be some malicious slur on someone's part. But I can't say who that would/could be. Geir Smith (talk) 23:53, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

The account User talk:Geir Smith has been blocked for three years.

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=The account User talk:Geir Smith has been blocked for three years. |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=The account User talk:Geir Smith has been blocked for three years. |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=The account User talk:Geir Smith has been blocked for three years. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

context: I blocked this account for vandalism (and off-site calls for vandalism). The "sockmaster" tag was added by User:Shirik [2]. This is possibly a misunderstanding, afaik this user has not been accused of sockpuppetry. --dab (𒁳) 13:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

right, now I see what has been going on: there is Geirsmith666 (talk · contribs), an account apparently created to stalk the real Geirsmith, and some admin misunderstood this as Geirsmith himself returning as a sock. If you speak French, you will realize that Geirsmith666 is a troll from France. The real Geirsmith by his own account also lives in France, so we probably have a case of a real-life enemy here. Needless to say, Geirsmith666 was blocked on sight, but this is how the "sockpuppetry" confusion arose. --dab (𒁳) 13:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily "real life". I now noted that Geir Smith is active on youtube under his real name, posting videos about how Obama is the antichrist or something. So this account probably attracted trolls from youtube. Not that this matters for our purposes, I suppose, as nothing here is in the remotest sense conductive to writing an encyclopedia. --dab (𒁳) 13:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I understand that Wikipedia do checks on people before allowing them to contribute. But I have no intention of resuming contributing as a vandal. Whatever I contributed three years ago has totally changed now and the same environment does not prevail today. I wish to voice opinions about the Birthers etc... I hope Wikipedia isn't censoring this important movement. (I must remind you that Michelle Bachmann and Donald Trump are Birthers and they both have/had double digit polls in persidential bids to their credit). I'm sure that informing about these major events can contribute to the History of Humanity and Wikipedia can't just censor that as not-existent. I understand that you may have opinions, such as liking Obama, but I doubt that that should obscure your judgment in enabling people to speak freely. Thank you.

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 understand that Wikipedia do checks on people before allowing them to contribute. But I have no intention of resuming contributing as a vandal. Whatever I contributed three years ago has totally changed now and the same environment does not prevail today.  I wish to voice opinions about the Birthers etc... I hope Wikipedia isn't censoring this important movement. (I must remind you that Michelle Bachmann and Donald Trump are Birthers and they both have/had double digit polls in persidential bids to their credit). I'm sure that informing about these major events can contribute to the History of Humanity and Wikipedia can't just censor that as not-existent. I understand that you may have opinions, such as liking Obama, but I doubt that that should obscure your judgment in enabling people to speak freely. Thank you. |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 understand that Wikipedia do checks on people before allowing them to contribute. But I have no intention of resuming contributing as a vandal. Whatever I contributed three years ago has totally changed now and the same environment does not prevail today.  I wish to voice opinions about the Birthers etc... I hope Wikipedia isn't censoring this important movement. (I must remind you that Michelle Bachmann and Donald Trump are Birthers and they both have/had double digit polls in persidential bids to their credit). I'm sure that informing about these major events can contribute to the History of Humanity and Wikipedia can't just censor that as not-existent. I understand that you may have opinions, such as liking Obama, but I doubt that that should obscure your judgment in enabling people to speak freely. Thank you. |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 understand that Wikipedia do checks on people before allowing them to contribute. But I have no intention of resuming contributing as a vandal. Whatever I contributed three years ago has totally changed now and the same environment does not prevail today.  I wish to voice opinions about the Birthers etc... I hope Wikipedia isn't censoring this important movement. (I must remind you that Michelle Bachmann and Donald Trump are Birthers and they both have/had double digit polls in persidential bids to their credit). I'm sure that informing about these major events can contribute to the History of Humanity and Wikipedia can't just censor that as not-existent. I understand that you may have opinions, such as liking Obama, but I doubt that that should obscure your judgment in enabling people to speak freely. Thank you. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Geir Smith (talk) 13:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I doubt that blocking someone indefinitely (3 YEARS! and as you explained just now, it was wrongly so.) is Wiki policy, and I remind you that in your block, you encouraged me to contact you for reviewing it. I'm now doing just that. I quote you: Feel free to apply for review of this block. dab (𒁳) 09:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC). It's on this page.[reply]

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 doubt that blocking someone indefinitely (3 YEARS! and as you explained just now, it was wrongly so.) is Wiki policy, and I remind you that in your block, you encouraged me to contact you for reviewing it. I'm now doing just that. I quote you: Feel free to apply for review of this block. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳)]]</small> 09:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC). It's on this page. |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 doubt that blocking someone indefinitely (3 YEARS! and as you explained just now, it was wrongly so.) is Wiki policy, and I remind you that in your block, you encouraged me to contact you for reviewing it. I'm now doing just that. I quote you: Feel free to apply for review of this block. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳)]]</small> 09:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC). It's on this page. |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 doubt that blocking someone indefinitely (3 YEARS! and as you explained just now, it was wrongly so.) is Wiki policy, and I remind you that in your block, you encouraged me to contact you for reviewing it. I'm now doing just that. I quote you: Feel free to apply for review of this block. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳)]]</small> 09:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC). It's on this page. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Geir Smith (talk) 13:51, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll just request this here and then contact someone else at Wikipedia, if this can't find any success from here.Geir Smith (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]