User talk:SorsImmanis1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Wafulz (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

This user's request to have the autoblock on his/her IP address lifted has been DECLINED.

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "SorsImmanis1". The reason given for SorsImmanis1's block is: "Disruptive editing: Trolling feminism talk page".

  • Decline reason:

You have not been autoblocked. However, you have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock|your_reason_here}} to your talk page. -- Stwalkerster [ sock:talk ] 18:18, 10 May 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: "I find it hard to understand why I have been blocked for disruptive edits after personal attacks on me from the users Cailel and SlRubenstein. In the discussion page for feminism my points are made clearly and without personal attack. My posts are all considered and reasoned and I feel I am being unjustly prevented from presenting my opinion. Cailil has had problems in the past with a user called EdgeRunner as I have read but I am not Edgerunner. Also Cailil's user page contains comments from another editor saying he is trolling somewhere else. My polite request for him to stop personal attacks against me that I posted to his page as the first step towards getting someone to investigate his behaviour was removed by him"

Decline reason: "When this is your first edit summary, there's no way, no matter how civil you are later, that you can claim you weren't trolling. -Daniel Case (talk) 20:44, 10 May 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.

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: "The edit you have raised Daniel was made as a result of following the advice for dealing with citation problems presented at WP:Citing_sources#Dealing_with_citation_problems. I don't see how that can be classed as trolling. I followed the advice to the letter and also followed the advice at the NPOV tutorial regarding editing pages that are biased. I followed these recommendations on wikipedia to boldly add the banners and raise this in the discussion page to create dialog about this with regards to improving the accuracy of the article. I believe that it is important that Cailel should prove his claim that

"feminism is a movement toward equal rights for women and or equality of the sexes is not disputable" before adding this to the article. I have mentioned in the discussion that this would be indisputable if it was attributed to feminist researchers but as a movement with ethical and political implications I believe he has to cite proof that this is the general consensus of Feminism. I was keen to discuss this but I have found the response to be exceptionally hostile from Calail and Slrubenstein e.g. here.

My opening of discussion on this subject has raised valid points that other editors have wished to comment on e.g. here which is all with the aim of ensuring that a NPOV can be established."

Decline reason: "Judging from your contributions, you seem to be a single-purpose account created for the purpose of promoting a particular point of view; request to unblock denied. For the record, I have skimmed through the discussion, and I maintain that your position does not have merit. In any case, you assert that feminism is not about equal rights, but rather about more rights - you provide evidence for that using reliable sources. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:26, 11 May 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.