68.236.155.129

Arbitration

Bring it. You said you would before, but didn't. You are a coward. Bring it. Do it quick, cause I have several requests in to make sure you are blocked. So I would get hoppin'. No help this time. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, blah blah blah. Go to another IP. We will catch you there and block you. Range block you if need be. We will block the accounts. So, just go to your other site and go away, you sad little troll. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Neutralhomer I strongly suggest you refrain from such language, if he is indeed going to ArbCom he'll just use it against you. ^{(Cheers! Want Anything? Chatty?)}_babylarm 00:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry, I let a troll get the best of me. This has been ongoing for a week now, so I got pissed, still am, and it came out full force. I will try my best to curtail that. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Believe me I am as much enraged by the affair as you are. ^{(Cheers! Want Anything? Chatty?)}_babylarm 01:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although we invite everyone to contribute constructively here, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did with this edit to User talk:Neutralhomer. You may wish to read the introduction to editing for more information about Wikipedia. Thank you. Zhang He (talk) 23:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User_talk:Babylonian Armor. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. All wikipedians have opinions. It is not your personal playground to go about and attack others regarding their opinions. ^{(Cheers! Want Anything? Chatty?)}_babylarm 23:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

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.

ANI

Per policy, I am to notify you when an ANI thread has begun about you. That thread can be viewed here. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:38, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom

I don't buy your problems, cause you contridicted yourself in your "story", but you have said numerous times you are going to ArbCom and haven't yet, so I don't think you are, personally. I don't think you are or will filed ArbCom paper one. So either file or kindly find a corner and stay there. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:48, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a period of 2 weeks from editing for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. -- Cirt (talk) 23:51, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I plan to file Arbitration proceedings and wish unblock for that purpose alone against User:Neutralhomer for filing harassing charges that are also false. I also plan to bypass the appeal process for this block and appeal it directly to Arbitration Committee. As a side note, JourneyManTraveler is not the same person as me. He's retired, and I too am retiring after the Arbitration proceedings if I can file. I and him are leaving Wikipedia after this matter. We may move over to Citizendium.

Decline reason:

None of that is a reason for unblocking. If you have chosen to appeal to ArbCom rather than requesting unblock here, that's fine, and if you're leaving Wikipedia anyway, there doesn't seem to be any reason for unblocking. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:12, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

---

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I obviously cannot make out a request for Arbitration without being unblocked, so FisherQueen's position is unacceptable. So I again require unblocking for the purpose of filing arbitration proceedings, and FisherQueen's position should not be given any weight. I cannot make out the arbitration page without an unblock.

Decline reason:

The only way your block will be lifted early is if you post an unblock request that actually addresses the reason for your block, your behavior, and how things will change to avoid future conflict. Any further misuse of the unblock template will only lead to the loss of your ability to edit this page. TNXMan 01:12, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

---

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.

What? You didn't go to arbitration, but just made a bunch of edits, not very polite, on various user talk pages, for more than a week. If you'd wanted to make an arbitration request, you would have done that. In two weeks, when this block expires, you'll get to decide again- if it wasn't an emergency a week ago, it doesn't seem like it's an emergency now. And if you don't plan to actually edit wikipedia any more, I don't understand what you'd be asking for arbitration for. Doesn't arbitration usually result in plans for future action, not general moral judgements? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

FisherQueen, whoever you are it isn't for you to decipher the motives behind my requests. I want to file Arbitration proceedings and I want to do it immediately. So you either grant my request, or if unblocked by another administrator I will add you to my complaint for failing to abide by my request for unblocking a justified reason and hence interfering with my due process rights not only under policy here but also legally guaranteed under the law. 68.236.155.129 (talk) 00:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right, I can't decipher your motives, but I can't find any evidence that any good for Wikipedia would result in unblocking you- and in any case, "legally guaranteed under the law," a legal threat, makes it impossible by policy for anyone to unblock you- if you're appealing through the legal system, you'll have to wait for those proceedings to conclude before filing your request for arbitration. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Before you go spouting off about what you "demand" under "law", you might want to read WP:NOT#DEM and WP:NOTLAW. Probably would want to freshen up on WP:NLT also. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

If you go to ArbCom you'll only end up worse then you are. You've attacked people and there is no justification for that. Wikipedia is a cooperative society, in fact, it's built on cooperative collaberation. Making personal attacks is a violation of that, and so many WP rules it's not even funny. If you go to ArbCom you may as well expect some testimony from me. ^{(Cheers! Want Anything? Chatty?)}_babylarm 00:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I still plan to go to the ArbCom, notwithstanding anything else. I have not actually filed anything legal, at least for now. I am holding off until the process here passes. But should it not pan out, such as I lose the arbitration, then I might consider such an option. But not for now. Besides, got other matters to attend to offline medically for myself. As to Babylonian Armor, I plan to make a motion to prevent your testimony from being taken. So I demand now absolutely the right to be unblocked for the purpose of making an appeal to the ArbCom. 68.236.155.129 (talk) 02:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

As to TNXMan, it isn't his place to decide what my motivations are or what constitutes misuse of the unblock request template. Leave that to ArbCom. 68.236.155.129 (talk) 02:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Dude, you don't get to decide who says what at your ArbCom. Once filed ANYONE can voice an opinion. You let the toothpaste out of the tube, it is out. You get no say on who says what. This isn't a court of law and you don't get to "file motions". That is covered under those WP:NOT#DEM and WP:NOTLAW rules, try reading them.

Also, if you are even considering legal action as a last resort, you are still considering it and it is still a legal threat.

But the big point to be made here is you keep saying time and time and time and time again that you are going to ArbCom and haven't. You didn't go when unblocked. You are just words and no actions. If you aren't going to ArbCom, great, saves us alot of time and you alot of embarrassment. If you are, great, we can settle this once and for all. Either way, it doesn't bother me, doesn't scare me, or anyone for that matter, and the truth will come out that you are a sock.

Continue to say you will take me to court, that means you are blocked indefintely until that court proceeding is over. Be sure to have me served, would ya? You won't get to edit here, your posts will be ignored and you will be blocked for awhile.

You have a choice, a couple actually. A) Drop this nonsense and become contributing member of Wikipedia. B) Leave Wikipedia and join some other site. C) File your ArbCom case and wait it out and be found out. D) File a lawsuit in a real life courtroom, be blocked from Wikipedia, be ignored and be forgotten. You have three choices. Pick one. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk Page Disabled

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I've disabled your talk page for the remainder of your block. TNXMan 02:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 07:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Legal threats

You have been blocked from editing for 1 year for making legal threats or taking legal action. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia as long as the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

After re-reviewing your edit history, I have decided to block you from editing for a year (because you are an IP user, I cannot indefinitely block you from editing without potentially affecting other users). I initially blocked you because you were repeatedly ([1] [2] [3]) removing references from the first paragraph with no explanation, which is in violation of the 3RR. You also violated the BLP policy by adding negative, contentious information about the individual without a source [4]. Furthermore, when Falcon8765 removed the citation for Akahi Nui's birth date (a citation that you were repeatedly removing), you put it back in. That last edit was proof to me that you were simply editing to be disruptive, and warranted a block. However, upon reviewing your edit history, I've found a large number of legal threats that you've been repeatedly making ([5] [6] [7] [8] [9]). Wikipedia has a clear policy on legal threats. If they are made, the user can be blocked on sight, indefinitely. Since you are an IP account, the block will last one year. However, keep in mind that you can be unblocked. However, in order to be unblocked, you need to unambiguously retract each legal threat that you have made. Until this dispute is resolved, you will remain blocked. If you need to communicate with Wikipedia to correct errors, see Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem. Thank you, and I hope this is worked out. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 21:26, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

---