User talk:Kitchen Knife
December 2022If 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 ~~~~}} . Girth Summit (blether) 22:48, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
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).
Kitchen Knife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: This block is purely vindictive by User:Girth Summit Kitchen Knife (talk) 22:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC) Decline reason: You have provided no reason to think so. Yamla (talk) 23:02, 7 December 2022 (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).
Kitchen Knife (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: This block is purely vindictive by User:Girth Summit, he really hasn't given a good reason for the block, hasn't said what the personal abuse is or articulated his thinking. He had a bee in his bonnet for some time, after first agree with some additions I'd made were useful and then quickly changing his mind when some other Mods disagreed. That rationale they used was spurious, and he just seem to decide which way the wind was blowing and follow that. I'm not sure anyone with a User name which references genitals should make comments about people's behaviour. His interpretation of NPA is perverse and is more a prevention of any form of criticism. As for the claim of Boomerang, that is just nonsense. In Girth's view all someone has to do is make a threat to report someone and they are then proof against being reported.Kitchen Knife (talk) Decline reason: Again, this is a pattern going back 10 YEARS. This didn't just happen overnight. Talk page access removed. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:17, 7 December 2022 (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.
Nomination of Beetroot cake for deletionA discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beetroot cake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beetroot cake until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.BaduFerreira (talk) 04:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC) Nomination of Meff for deletionA discussion is taking place as to whether the article Meff is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meff until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. |