User talk:24.187.112.15

February 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one full year in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Toddst1 (talk) 06:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Gave opinion on Drudge talk page. Am I not allowed to express an opinion on a discussion page? I was trying to improve the page and make it more accurate. Isn't that what the discussion page is for?

Decline reason:

Trolling and broad unsubstantiated accusations are not acceptable on discussion pages. This is obviously the same person behind the IP address as was blocked for making hyperbolic accusations regarding partisan leans in editors and pages. I don't agree with the block length (and I may shorten it after conferring with the blocking admin), but the block itself is basically sound. If you have more to add to wikipedia than ranting on talk pages you are welcome to edit productively upon the expiry of this block. Thank you. Protonk (talk) 07:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

---

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Expressing an opinion on why a page should be changed or worded differently is not trolling. Especially on the discussion page. There were no personal attacks or harrassment.

Decline reason:

Wikipedia is not a soapbox. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

---

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 will be reported to the press as part of a story being done on how Wikipedia moderators issue bans if someone's edits are different than the moderator's opinions.

Yes, that's the way to get yourself unblocked. I told you this was going to happen if you could not learn to work and play nicely with others. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 07:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You are what's wrong with wikipedia. Just look at your talk page. "My Conservapedia account, since someone has to keep them honest." You are clearly a liberal who censors any thought or fact that you disagree with. Who is keeping Wiki honest? Obviously nobody.24.187.112.15 (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

---