User talk:Fisted Rainbow

Welcome to my talk page

January 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Guy (Help!) 22:30, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I have not breached any Wiki policies that warrant such an extreme measure. Not knowing some rules and quickly learning once told about them should not be a reason to block me. At no stage have I committed anything of profound significance to warrant a block action to this degree Fisted Rainbow (talk) 02:23, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You've both claimed to be Spiro Boursine and claimed not to be Spiro Boursine. Until this paradox is settled, you should probably stay blocked. If you are Spiro, you should send proof to OTRS. If you are not him, you should explain why you've impersonated him. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:28, 7 January 2018 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

reason Please show me the section where one needs to be id'd to be a editor on Wikipedia. I thought editors enjoyed being anonymous. If this isnt the case then let me know Fisted Rainbow (talk) 13:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 13:22, 7 January 2018 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

reason I understand why I have been blocked now and didn't realise this reason was a Wiki policy/rule in the first place. I will endeavour to study the rules more carefully and not via trial and error as I have done. Thanks Fisted Rainbow (talk) 13:28, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Having two unblock requests open at the same time achieves nothing except wasting the time of the administrator who closes them both. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:23, 7 January 2018 (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 still haven't addressed the concern raised by NinjaRobotPirate (talk · contribs). You are not likely to be unblocked until you do so. --Yamla (talk) 14:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

reason I was accused of being him so I went along with the story to get to the end of the debate and come to a compromise which is what happened. How this warrants a block I am happy to see which Wiki policy this has to do with. Fisted Rainbow (talk) 14:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have a history of disruptive editing of several kinds, including a battleground approach to other editors, personal attacks, disparaging and contemptuous remarks about other editors, total contempt for consensus and for the idea of editing collaboratively, attempting to control the content of an article as though you own it, editing to promote a point of view and to suppress any content inimical to that point of view, lying, attempting to intimidate editor by threatening legal action, edit warring, etc etc etc. The reason given for your block is that you are "Clearly not here to contribute to the encyclopedia" and that is absolutely spot on. The fact that you now claim that you were lying when you claimed to be the person whose interest you were blatantly trying to serve does not even remotely come near to being a reason to unblock you. As for your previous unblock request which I am also closing, I am not at all sure which of the various pieces of unacceptable behaviour you "didn't realise ... was a Wiki policy/rule", but if you need "rules" to tell you not do to each one of the unacceptable things you have done, such as lying, attacking other editors, and so on and so on, then it is unlikely that you will ever be able to fit into editing Wikipedia. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:23, 7 January 2018 (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 are not permitted to blank existing declines for a currently active block. Please do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]