User talk:Antifa for justice

December 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors.

If 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 ~~~~}}. – bradv🍁 01:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

@Bradv:

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).

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

Request reason:

Why did you not respond or present me some form of option to further explain the legitimate basis of my allegations? If you look at my second-last edit on User talk:Þjarkur you will see a well laid-out explanation of how their objection to my edit request on Mark Twain (which essentially called any attempt to call a historical figure racist invalid because racism used to be okay) was an example of a common defense used by neo-nazis. I did no harm to anyone and cannot believe that simply bringing this issue up is grounds for a block. I wasn't trying to act unilaterally I simply wanted to provide admins with the information. The reason I said email me for more details is because i didnt want to slander anyone publicly any more than necessary to get admins attention.

Decline reason:

There is a logical flaw in your argument. If we accept that neo-nazis use the presentism argument, it does not follow that all people who mention presentism are neo-nazis. (Hitler was a painter; it does not follow that all painters are Nazis.) It is absolutely unacceptable to call another editor a neo-nazi. Yes, it was harsh to block you with no warning, but at the same time, I see how your conduct and username give the appearance that you are not here to contribute constructively or collaboratively. I am declining your unblock request; the only way I would consider an unblock is if you acknowledged that you were in the wrong to cast aspersions on another editor and agreed to a topic ban covering racism and nazi/neo-nazi movements, broadly construed. —C.Fred (talk) 02:11, 9 December 2019 (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.

I will leave this for another admin to review, but I considered your post at ANI a violation of Wikipedia's policy prohibiting personal attacks. It has been removed from the page history. – bradv🍁 02:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bradv: Will other admins even be able to see my post if you deleted it from page history? Or will they have no evidence to reconsider and thus decide against me by default?

It was revision-deleted but not oversighted. Admins, myself included, are able to see the diff. —C.Fred (talk) 02:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I did not realize there was different levels of deletion for page history.Antifa for justice (talk) 02:22, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do you really think I would be stupid enough to post it at the ADMINISTRATORS NOTICEBOARD of all places, if I was knowingly violating policy?? Antifa for justice (talk) 02:08, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you had intended to use this argument, possibly. Regardless, it is against policy. Your intentions are irrelevant to the fact you made personal attacks. Vermont (talk) 02:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Second unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

okay, you are right, I probably jumped the gun a bit there, and I should not have called him/her a nazi. If a topic ban is the only way to avoid a total ban, I can live with that - at least there are other ways to contribute that are not related to controversy

Decline reason:

Probably? No, you don't get off for unprovoked attacks on other editors so easily. And yes, I can see the email address you tried to post. You set a trap, and I don't think this is the first time you've been blocked on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 02:26, 9 December 2019 (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.

This is now a checkuser block. SQL ^{Query me!} 02:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]