User talk:Kci357

December 2011

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges, as you did at Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 16:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kci357, I got your email about your block. I'd prefer to have any discussions on-wiki, where it is on the record and observable to all. Toddst1 (talk) 22:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why you blocked me? As I said in my e-mail to you this was not a reentry it was a new edit. I left three separate references for my edit. This was not a return to previous behavior because I was previously blocked for edit warring, and I did not do any edit warring.

Having a conversation on a talk page with one of your socks to justify continuing (or returning to) your one-person campaign about the dangers and/or your safety concerns of ABS (yet again) is plenty. See note below. Toddst1 (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Superhands99 and I are not related. Superhands has been a member since 2007 and he left that comment on the talk page 4 months ago and I just responded to it days ago. Kci357 (talk) 23:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To any administrator considering modifying this block

Please see discusssion at Talk:Acrylonitrile_butadiene_styrene#Safety. Also please evaluate the similarities between this editor and Kj650 (talk · contribs) and all of their socks. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2011 (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).

Kci357 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please see my comments that I left above directed to the blocking administrator. As I said superhands99 and I are not related, the comment superhands99 made on the talk page was made four months ago and I had responded to it months after he made that comment. He has been a member since 2007. As for the edit I made it was not a reentry it was a new edit. It was backed by three separate references and the edit was taken almost word for word from the references. Kci357 (talk) 11:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were not blocked for sockpuppetry but for resuming your disruptive editing of Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene, which you were explicitly told not to do when your account was unblocked. Favonian (talk) 13:06, 7 January 2012 (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.

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).

Kci357 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I spoke with a Wikipedia administrator named Acalamari who told me I was allowed to edit on the ABS plastic article as long as I did not edit war. Kci357 (talk) 14:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No, you were unblocked under the condition that not only do you follow policies to the letter, you would not return to the same type of editing problems that led to your block in the first place. You were blocked because your edits were inappropriate. It was assumed based on your statements that you had learned your lesson, and would not repeat them. However, the first thing you did was violate the good faith shown by Acalamari. Any further unblock requests that do not meet WP:GAB will result in the immediate locking of this talkpage, and can lead to a WP:BAN discussion (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:05, 7 January 2012 (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.