User talk:Blockinblox

Hi, I just started my account on en.wikipedia with the Username Blockinblox, and was immediately blocked by Curps. For 'explanation', he wrote that I have to contact an admin for 'verifiability'. Come on, I haven't even made any posts here yet and my name is not offensive. I have accounts on several other wikis. What gives? Do you need me to prove that I am the same Blockinblox as on another wiki?

I would have emailed Curps, but he doesn't take email. I would like to be unblocked ASAP, I am a serious editor and haven't done anything wrong, okay. Thanks. Also, could you respond on my talk page at en.wikipedia, it's kind of a pain (although not impossible) to get to this yahoo account. Much appreciated,

Blockinblox.

I've unblocked you; I guess Curps thought you were a vandal who has been around a lot today under various names. Adam Bishop 23:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks...

Thanks...! If any of the other folks I contacted sees this, sorry to waste your time, thanks anyway, and thanks for giving me a chance... Amor, BLockinblox

Do you have any sources for saying that clerics has been jailed in scandinavia? Sounds like made up echochamber stuff to me --BernieLomax 19:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vital Articles problem and possible solution

I've listed an idea at the village pump and on the vital articles talkpage in repsonses to your complaint on the lack of cross-cultural integration in the list. What do you think?--The i kiroid (talk/parler/hablar/paroli/说/話) 21:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nice

[1] -- here is an example of what I consider "moderately scary": [2]. And here is an example of what I consider a heroic cleanup effort in the interest of the project: [3]. dab (𒁳) 19:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you're right, At first glance, it looks like a big improvement, so far. And no, I have not researched much about the Kamboja people. I have heard of them too; I know enough to know that they are a real people, not a fringe theory, but one that for some reason generic history books try to avoid, and only specialist books address. I only hope that you are not going to delete too much information about them, but I will have to trust your discretion, I suppose - I just thought it was only fair that the actual experts who have researched very much on the subject and have worked on the article, be alerted to things going on over their heads. Blockinblox (talk) 19:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

indeed -- I have no interest in deleting valuable information, and the "Kamboja continuum" contains a wealth of references, all thrown into an unstructured heap. Don't be misled by the "fringe" moniker, I wouldn't dream of claiming the Kambojas, as such, are "fringe". But this is a case of WP:SYN, and of seriously heavy {{cleanup}}, and the "SYN" in question does involve various "fringe" bits, such as "Aratta", and the persistent harping on the a Central Asian homeland (which is a plausible hypothesis without much consequence to the topic itself). dab (𒁳) 20:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you are making a fool of yourself now. If you want to draw attention to WP:FTN, just do it, but try to avoid silly rhetorics like "ominous, behind-the scenes". WP:FTN is neither ominous nor behind the scenes. I have dealt with ominous, behind the scenes "projects", they are coordinated off-wiki, in closed yahoo groups. Your WP:POINT appears to be that it has been "vetoed" to leave a note on article talkpages. You are wrong. Nobody has every "vetoed" such a thing. There is nothing wrong with posting notices to talkpages. All that I (and others) have said was that it isn't proper to demand every article talked about somewhere else on Wikipedia mandatorily needs to be notified of the fact. WP:UCS. If you want to make it your job to "notify" people of discussions on noticeboards, feel free to do that, as long as people don't tell you to stop spamming them with notifications of discussions they have no interest in, there is nothing wrong with that. dab (𒁳) 13:26, 9 January 2008 (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) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of American Academy of Private Physicians

The article American Academy of Private Physicians has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

SIMPD was never formally renamed AAPP, and it completely ceased operation after 2016

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]