User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/2023 December

Previous · Index · Next

Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Rich Farmbrough/Archive (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have no intention of breaking editing restrictions. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC).

Accept reason:

Unblocked, see comment below — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

@Worm That Turned and Barkeep49: as the blocking administrators. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 22:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

My block was for 1 month so I think WTT is really the blocking admin here. I will just note beyond the discussion which led WTT to turn my 1 month into an indefinite (which I believe I supported at the time) that Rich's behavior led WTT to make a good metaphor around wildflowers which I expanded and turned into the essay WP:WILDFLOWERS. But there was never any need for this to be an indefinite block so from my, non-blocking admin POV, if an admin is convinced rich will not repeat the problems that led to the first block, this should be accepted. Barkeep49 (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

WTT hasn't edited in over a month. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 00:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC).

Given the complicated history here, and the extensive discussion that led to the latest block, I think any unblock request should go to WP:AN for review. Rich, would you be willing to craft an unblock request more appropriate for that forum? – bradv 01:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I think AN is an option for Rich but in no way should this block require community consensus to undo. That is not in the spirit of either the block I placed or what WTT placed. If Rich would prefer AN review, fine. If Rich prefers typical unblock review I think that should be on the table. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what could be clearer than my unblock request above. I'd rather keep this simple, it's an unblock request that addresses the block reason pretty much head on, and should be capable of resolution here. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 16:26, 31 December 2023 (UTC).

Welcome back. Very happy to see this rather belated request and look forward to seeing your return to the project in 2024. As noted above, Dave is currently inactive, however I believe he would support an unblock in the circumstances. The unblock request is quite clear, and I accept it as genuine and sincere. I will be monitoring your edits regularly and will not hesitate to reblock if I judge that you controvene your editing restrictions — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I have no confidence that Rich will remain on the right side of his editing conditions, but equally no objections to this unblock, good luck for the future Worm^TT(talk) 00:52, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I find your lack of faith … disturbing. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 04:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC).

Rich, I blocked you indefinitely because you stated, clearly, that you felt the burden of the restrictions would be intolerable and you would not go along with them. Your unblock request simply stated your "intent" to follow them. Based on your history, I'm expecting you to breach your restrictions and claim good intentions. Please do prove me wrong. Worm^TT(talk) 11:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Martin. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 04:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC).