User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been temporarily blocked from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

Blocked three months. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yoshiaki Omura#Log of blocks and bans, and WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Richardmalter. You are banned by Arbcom from editing Yoshiaki Omura or (by inference) its successor article BDORT or its talk page. If you wish to appeal this block, I recommend that you use the {{unblock}} template to get the attention of an administrator, and then ask him to forward your request to WP:Arbitration enforcement. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify, if I understand this correctly, the indefinite editing ban on those articles still stands after this three month block expires. Malter is welcome to edit other articles after the block expires. I would add that he should always log in, since using more than one account is generally frowned upon except under special conditions. In a case like this, editing as an IP violates the prohibition against seeking to avoid the scrutiny of other editors. This actually applies to all editors. If I have misunderstood things or am incorrect, I'm sure someone will correct me. Again, Malter is welcome to become a good contributor to all other articles once the block expires. -- Brangifer (talk) 06:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)