User talk:Van danken

NPOV and your new category

Firstly follow the above advice and abide by WP:NPOV. Your removal of terror categories and a few others without reasoning and the imposition of your own republican cateory can be regarded as a lack of NPOV. Secondly whilst I am tempted to do it, seeing as it is your creation, do you mind fixing the category name and all of its inclusions? I assume you didn't mean to use "Goody Friday". Mabuska ^(talk) 18:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you are confused. I removed those categories because they are redundant. Whats the point in having both the article in both the "terrorist incidents in london" category and the "terrorists incidents in the uk" category? That seems very redundant to me.

Then what is your reason for removing it from the Omagh article? I don't see any parent or child terrorism cats that make it redundant. If the categories you removed are a child or parent of categories listed alongside it then I can agree about redundancy but not if they aren't. Did you check or just remove them based on a hunch? Mabuska ^(talk) 22:06, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I made a mistake there. I have put it back in.

Don't forget to fix the Goody Friday category name mistake :-) Mabuska ^(talk) 11:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh Labour

Please don't leave misleading edit summaries. A previous editor was bold, they were reverted the next stage is that they discuss. This is covered in WP:BRD. You are not reverting edit warring, you were edit warring. This matter has been discussed before many times on different political party pages so there is a strong body of prior discussion to draw on. I see from the history on this page you have already been made aware of the WP:BRD guideline so please respect it ----Snowded ^TALK 21:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 00:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for Disruptive editing, edit warring, uncivil communication and this.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 00:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for racist attacks.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 11:31, 12 November 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

"racist attacks, eg edit summary "(Undid revision 809866643 by Bastun (talk) untermensch stalker)" The above is the reason given for my ban. The label "racist attacks" is completely bizarre considering untermensch is not a racial term, as the article of the term makes clear. Now that this has been cleared up I would like to apologise for the personal attacks and will not do it again. I believe an indefinite ban for personal attacks is very harsh.Van danken (talk) 12:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Editors who make racist personal attacks forgo the privilege of debate. CIreland (talk) 12:42, 12 November 2017 (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.