User talk:Carljung

October 2009

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on User talk:Ckatz. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. GSK (talk ● evidence) 03:56, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your civil comment but Ckatz's behavior in removing material about which she has very little knowledge made me write it. I have no problem in an editor correcting certain things but removing material without knowledge and always getting behind the facade of vandalism and other jargons is not productive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carljung (talk • contribs)

Ckatz has the right to remove things from their talk page. If you continually reinsert it, it's not assuming good faith, and is, in fact, harassment. -- GSK (talk ● evidence) 04:49, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indef block

This account is indef blocked as a single purpose harassment account. Please see contributions for evidence. Do not unblock this account without contacting me first. Jehochman ^Talk 18:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I apologize if my comments have hurt anybody. The intention was not to hurt anybody but to bring to the notice of other administrators the behavior of Ckatz who is an administrator and so should be cautious in her administrative duty and not be vindictive and rush in deletion of subject matter about which she has very little knowledge. There is no personal animosity from my side and my comments were in good faith to improve the Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

The fact that you created an account specifically for the purpose of "bringing notice" belies your statement that your actions were in good faith. Your comments are incivil, this obviously is not your first account, and you clearly have no intention to contribute here, so you will not be unblocked. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:32, 19 October 2009 (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.

As it turns out, I was correct. Checkuser has

Confirmed that you are User:Akraj. I've noted this in your block log, and will be blocking that account shortly. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]