User talk:Lr0^^k

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia as of 21 August 2015.

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).

Lr0^^k (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was aware of policy, reverts fall under WP:NOT3RR, as suspected socks involved Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AndresHerutJaim, subsequent reverts by friends/people called upon by sock included reverts of constructive edits. Once the reverting of constructive material stopped, no reverts done. Please see page History. Discussion of 'contested' additions (initiated by sock) currently undergoing on talk page. I would like to appeal block, and in the worst case a simple 'topic ban', as all edits on this site constructive. Thank you495656778774 (talk) 22:08, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Accusing others of sockpuppetry isn't really an excuse. If you believe that someone is a sock, discuss it on the talk page or bring it up at SPI. Offhand I notice that one of the accounts (User:Mikrobølgeovn) has been active since 2009 and while that doesn't mean that someone isn't a sock, it does make it less likely. You also need to take this into consideration: what if they aren't socks and aren't people getting their friends to revert your edits. What if it was just that you wrote something that might have been wrong? This is when you need to go discuss things on the talk page, not just start edit warring. I think that you should take this time to look over general editing guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:14, 22 August 2015 (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.

• You can blank most other things on your userpage but you cannot blank out any block/unblock posts. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I would prefer that you not try to hide this. If you are not coming back to Wikipedia then why should it matter if this is on your userpage? To be honest, take this into consideration: the block is not permanent, it is temporary. Saying that you are going to retire just because you weren't unblocked to immediately edit does not reflect well on you, nor does trying to hide the fact that you were blocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:55, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]