User talk:68.14.199.135

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

November 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm John Cline. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Woody Hayes, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —John Cline (talk) 06:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Woody Hayes with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. —John Cline (talk) 06:39, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Woody Hayes with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. —John Cline (talk) 06:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Woody Hayes, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Woody Hayes was changed by 68.14.199.135 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.905176 on 2013-11-19T06:47:42+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 06:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 07:09, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

68.14.199.135 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribs deleted contribscreation log change block settingsunblockfilter log)


Request reason:

I was blocked because a guy named John Cline made his OWN JUDGEMENT CALL that I added personal analysis. That is pure nonsense. I am an Ohio State former trustee and everything I wrote is documented and pure fact. Just because this guy Cline doesn't like what I said - he blocked me and concoct this silly "reason" for doing so. The block needs to be removed please. I did not write one piece of untrue information. I added zero personal opinion. Woody Hayes was a very sick person with a long pattern of tantrums and verbal and physical abuse, who was so sick he actually punched a college student 45 years his junior and was fired in disgrace. That is pure, objective fact - and is supposed to be included in this article. Remove the block please or you will be sued for censorship and libel.

Decline reason:

The last sentence of your unblock request suffices to keep you blocked. We do not tolerate legal threats around here. --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

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.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

68.14.199.135 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribs deleted contribscreation log change block settingsunblockfilter log)


Request reason:

I provided a valid reason, and was turned down because an Administrator is taking things personal and you have broken the law. I was blocked for no good reason whatsoever. I edited an article about Woody Hayes, ex football coach at ohio state who was fired n disgrace for punching a student, had a long history of mental illness, temper tantrums, and violence. A completely out of control redneck jerk. To put it nicely - he was an embarrassment to our school. I was a trustee at OSU for over 30 years and donated over $2 million dollars to that school. I paid his salary for crying out loud. I helped hundreds of kids get scholarships they otherwise would not have received. Every single thing I typed was pure, documented, witnessed fact. I was blocked by an Admin who used a stupid reason, that I used personal analysis, which is complete nonsense. I then said you will be sued if you do not unblock, which is completely reasonable - and you should expect that. You don't block facts from being printed folks - that is not your job, and it is not your job to block something simply because you don't like it. I typed ALL FACTS, no personal analysis or opinion. Just read this article - even this article documents a small fraction of the embarrassing incidents he caused. SO I appealed the block, and another admin - who we are now investigating - then said just because of me saying you will be sued, said the block will not be removed. He never even addressed the facts I wrote! He gave me this garbage reason and hid behind it like a coward. This is pure garbage, and it is illegal. You are censoring factual material, you are passing inaccurate judgement, that reflects poorly on me. That is a libel suit among other things, as an ex attorney. You are using your personal opinions to block facts, that is also illegal. I have several charges listed that we are pursuing. Instead of unblocking me and acknowledging the fact you are preventing factual data from being displayed, this admin kept my block in place simply because you were put on notice. That is nonsense - and that is not the job of the admin. Remove the block please, and stop censoring facts. I know more about this guy than all of you combined - I saw it all happen and it was all documented. The things I wrote improved the article, accurately reflected how sick and out of control this clown Hayes was, and was 100% documented and eye witnessed fact. So put it in there.

Decline reason:

Your unblock request(s) cannot be considered unless you revoke your legal threats. Additional legal threats may result in the loss of your ability to edit this talk page. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

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.

I strongly suggest that you read the link that was provided by the previous admin. It should help you see why your current request is doomed to fail. 129.78.68.1 (talk) 06:09, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Continued block[edit]

Octagon-warning.svg

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 month as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. Bearian (talk) 13:07, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, the current version of the article, Woody Hayes, clearly shows how and why he was fired, both in the lede, and in the body of the article. This is not a case of a current coach, who could be, or become, a danger to players, so the truth must be told. Hayes was long retired and like Francisco Franco, since 1987, he's still dead. Bearian (talk) 13:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)