User talk:84.50.127.105

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Regarding reversions[1] made on February 8, 2008 to Mart Laar

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.
The duration of the block is 48 hours. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 22:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this 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 request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "First of all I would like to thank User:Moreschi for his/her strict actions fighting against edit waring. The blocking is definitely justified as I violated 3RR, although the violation of 3RR wasn't my intention. When I discovered that I reverted user:RJ CG fourth time in total (one of my edits in this article didn't revert any text) and that I violated 3RR, I wanted to revert myself. Unfortunately this was impossible as I already was reverted by user:RJ CG. Therefore I just stopped any further edit. I understand that this is probably not the valid reason for unblocking. However, in case I will be unblocked I promise that I will voluntary avoid this article at least given blocking period. At the same time I think that adding a tag asking for verification of reference added by user:RJ CG was justified because this reference doesn't supported added claims. This is not the right place to discuss this, but I would like to ask if any third party could check the reference and confirm if the reference consists information added by user:RJ CG or not. Thank you.84.50.127.105 (talk) 07:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "The block as such is uncontested. An unblock on parole is declined due to this being an anonymous IP address. — Sandstein (talk) 09:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Fair enough.84.50.127.105 (talk) 10:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Identity

I understand that Moreschi have some questions about my identity. I think that the best way is to get answers from the primary source.

  • As it was figured out I have long time knowledge about editing in Wiki. Editing as anom IP is not a crime, at least so far if you don't abuse the rules, so I really don't understand the interest.
  • I am NOT Digwuren. Of course, I knew Digwuren by his edits and ArbCom case, but I never have been in contact with him in or outside of Wikipedia. And I don't have a knowledge who is Digwuren in his real life.
  • I don't knew if I am a reincarnation or not, never been interested about this business. But as it was my first block ever (and I really hope the last one, because I try not violate any rule anymore) nor been part of any ArbCom case, I don't think that Moreschi or any other admin has any reason to know me.
  • I am editing (actually, these days not very often) as IP intentionally. Reasons for this are personal, but similar to these why lot of Estonian editors (and good editors, by the way) have left Wikipedia recently. But again, editing as IP is not a crime per se.

So if you have any further question you are welcome to ask directly using this page.84.50.127.105 (talk) 08:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, fine. Thanks for helping. If only all the people I block were as cooperative. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 22:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)