User talk:Grinchsmate

mulesing

Hi - I had the wrong reference listed for the "should" quote but I've corrected it now. I've explained the change in the talk page. I don't know about the regulations governing mulesing but the source that someone else used is pretty clear. Another source I found stated that AWI is in the process of establishing certification for those mulesing. Sounds to me like anyone can do mulesing - there is no law about it. Do you know otherwise, or do you have references to support that those who do mulesing must be licensed or regulated in any way? ThanksBob98133 (talk) 19:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

im not trying to be rude but this page is really only for personal attacks. i answered on the talk page Grinchsmate (talk) 03:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry. I thought personal pages were for detailed discussion past what other editors would want to read on the talk page, but I'll move any future comments there. I appreciate you going through the article and making changes and your willingness to discuss them. I'll reply with any future questions to the mulesing talk page. Thanks Bob98133 (talk) 14:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no worries

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 24 hours for gratuitous use of inflammatory language and attacking other editors based on their nationality.[1] To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Raymond Arritt (talk) 16:33, 21 March 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

i cant email you for some weird reason i cant work out so i hope you can see this. if this is about first commet on global wrming page, could you please explain which editor i attacked and for bieng of which nationality. and ill just clarify that my comment was not condoning anyones personal attack, i couldnt actually see any, it was to make the point that nazi is not a horrible diry word and it can be used to describe people who are restraing others personal freedom however slightly.

Decline reason:

Unfortunately, if you do not understand why calling other editors 'Nazis' is not acceptable, you are likely to do it again, and so an unblock would not be appropriate. And no, it isn't appropriately used to 'describe people who are restraing others personal freedom however slightly,' except by very young children who haven't yet learned what it means. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:09, 21 March 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

someone please answer my first question, who did i attack and what nationality did i attack. the nazis restricted personal freedom, if a person tries to do this then they are acting like a nazi, of course they are not as extreme, but thats what they are doing, so please explain when egageration was restricted to children is it a recent development or have i been living in the dark

Decline reason:

Your remark was painting Raymond Armitt and Kim Petersen as "nazis". You didn't refer to them by name, but your comment, in context, was clearly referring to them. The rule against negative comments on other contributors (WP:NPA) has nothing to do with your age - no matter how old you are, your comment was inappropriate, and the block for it was appropriate. I see no reason to lift the block early since you are still defending your comment. Mango juice^talk 17:34, 21 March 2008 (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.

now i will verge on a personal attack by saying that in the opinion of some my bolck could be seen as a face saving move by an admin to show that a comment they made is not stupid. and to fisherqueen if you read my page you will see i am 13, is that young enough

I had not looked at your user page, and didn't realize that you were so young, though that is consistent with my comment above. While we do have some young users, not all young people have yet learned enough to be able to edit Wikipedia appropriately. If that's you, we all understand that you might come back in three or four years and be much more able to make appropriate edits, and the problems you had in your youth will all be forgiven and forgotten. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

are you now proposing a block of several years. and what is consisten twith the comment above, that i am so young, i see nothing like that there. or that you are ignorant of the situation there is pleanty of evidence for that

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).

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

Request reason:

thank you mangojuice i now know who you think i attacked, can someone please tell me which nationality i attacked, i have already been informed that appparently "Nazi" is inflammatory language. and "I see no reason to lift the block early since you are still defending your comment" so the only time you will ever lift a block is if the person changes their mind about what they said, so it has nothing to do with the block being wrong in the first place. hankyou for showing how wikipedia actually works

Decline reason:

"so the only time you will ever lift a block is if the person changes their mind about what they said". In cases of clear incivility like this, yes indeed. In the real world there's a name for that practice: apologizing. Ordinarily I'd tell you you're out of unblock requests for now, and warn you that the next one would lead to the page being protected so you couldn't make any more, but this time I'm willing to see if you can bring yourself to do it for the next reviewing admin to consider. -Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 22 March 2008 (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.