November 2011

edit

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at African National Congress. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. I understand that feelings are running high over the secrecy bill, but Wikipedia is not a platform for political activism. Thank you. - htonl (talk) 11:33, 23 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Your recent edits to User talk:Htonl could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. The Bushranger One ping only 00:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
 
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

Skier Dude (talk) 04:23, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit
 
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).

128.141.151.119 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I wasn't making legal threats against anybody... All I was saying was that, in line with the new ANC bill that was passed, that uncensoring information could lead to imprisonment. I'm not sure how that is me making a legal threat... It's not like I can do anything about that. I was just trying to make a point.

Decline reason:

When used to "win" an argument or quiet a discussion, the use of potential for legal does count as a legal threat (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:24, 25 November 2011 (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.

edit
 
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).

128.141.151.119 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I'm not making a threat though... I'm not even saying that I am potentially going to use any legal action, at all. It's like saying that if you commit a crime you will go to jail - that isn't a threat, that's just what happens, I'm not threatening anyone with legal action. I don't even live in the same country, I'm not even a South African! So I'm not sure how that would even work :/

Decline reason:

This reads like a legal threat to me. But even if it wasn't, your only other contributions have been vandalism, so I see no reason to unblock you. An optimist on the run! 10:53, 25 November 2011 (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.

edit
 
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).

128.141.151.119 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Okay, well it really wasn't a legal threat at all. I really have no idea how anyone would even perceive that to be the case. I'm sorry if it came across that way. You're the admin, so I have to listen. I understand that you don't want to unblock me - fair enough, my behaviour thus far has not been deserving of that anyway, I agree. I am done with that, so if I am unblocked it won't happen again, although, I do understand if you don't.

Decline reason:

Still not a retraction - now you're just wasting people's time. Although I have already declined one unblock, as this is not a valid unblock request, I have no issues declining it (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:11, 25 November 2011 (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 have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process. You may still contest any current block by e-mailing unblock-en-l, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:11, 25 November 2011 (UTC)Reply