Frizstyler
Welcome!
|
August 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Rufus Hussey has been reverted.
Your edit here to Rufus Hussey was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ieWrWLjii0) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 14:10, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
leaving messages as a forum
Regarding your comments in this talk page. Please note that Wikipedia is not a forum of discussion, talk pages are to discuss changes to the article, not to discuss the subject of the article. That includes, for example, proposing changes, pointing out errors, pointing at sources that contradict part of the article, suggesting improvements, etc. Your messages were removed because they don't discuss changes to the articles, and they are similar to forum comments.
To see why the comments were removed, you can go to Talk:Republic_of_Macedonia and click on "View History", at the right top of the page. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
- See also the warnings at the top of the page. There is a warning that says "Any threads relating to the title of the article will be speedily archived." There were lots of discussion about the name, so people finally made a very big discussion to end all discussions, and they wrote Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Macedonia). --Enric Naval (talk) 09:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Warnings, again
Your recent editing history at Talk:Macedonian language shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article/topic ban. Thank you.
Blocked
Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
- You've been POV-pushing and edit warring, in violation of an Arbitration Case, and continued after being warned about the case. Since there are no real positive contributions from this account, I have blocked indefinitely, rather than a time-consuming series of escalating blocks. Please go fight your battles elsewhere. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:19, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
you just blocked me. where is the statement from the arbitration commitee explaining why my answer to the arbitration was wrong? and what did you decide about me being deleted in the talk pages? did you even read it? ohhhhhhhhh don't push me man this won't be of any use to you--Frizstyler (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I know I just blocked you. You are here to push a nationalist POV. We already have more of that than we can easily deal with, and don't need more. You were warned to stop and you didn't. The Arbitration Committee decision is at WP:ARBMAC, as you were told before. Yes, I read the AE thread and links before commenting. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
i don't think so. i had some reasonable points there. of course nobody answers but blocks me.i also said i'm gonna re-open the discussions about the pages names and disambiguation. all u can say is that i'm pov pushing and block me. just so you remember, you've made wikipedia a whorehouse. any cyberclown can come here and promote his crap. you've decided here to name the pages as you like,this small gruevski fan club,no matter what others think since 2009. nice trolls,trolls are successful so far. i was warned to stop WHAT? DISCUSSING? WTF.give me a wikipedia employee's office contact info. no more crap from you--Frizstyler (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- I can assure you the Wikimedia Foundation is not going to side with you where article content or sanctions are involved, not because they have a stake in it but because they only intervene in the direst of circumstances. Placating a whiny ethnopolitical edit-warrior is not one of them, especially if said edit-warrior is blinded by his flag to the point he wants to paint everything like it. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:46, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
the wikimedia foundation knows how to protect its clarity.the only in difficult position is you,protecting your vanity like your teddy bear,well time to realize you can't censor your way through. you're so funny censoring me with pathetic excuses to block me,but you've just made your last mistake and revealed your characters. your plan supporting gruevski's propaganda in wikipedia would some time become obvious to everyone. i don't think i have to remind many times that i discontinued the edit war(as you call it) once people against me appeared. all i want is to reopen the 2 discussions. why are you so afraid? lol--Frizstyler (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
now that you are about to get exposed and ,i guess, unemployed, do you have some other job to do? bulgarian EU passports are available. become bulgarian & get yours now!! taivo i think you can get discount! hahahahaha XD --Frizstyler (talk) 13:41, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Frizstyler (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
there is no reason for me getting blocked.an irrelevant with the issue american admin called floquenbaum decided that i 'm blocked. without answering any of my claims because obviously he didn't even care.admin future perfect is a useless admin that is here to push his macedonism pov(look at contribs and history of blocking and censoring people).in fact, i have a list of his arbitrations waiting for him once i'm unblocked.well,if you want it the technical way,here goes Edit-warring to include polemic POV material on Macedonian language: [76][77][78][79] this was not polemic pov material ,it is a proven popular opinion that i wrote in the appropriate section about this opinion. i understand i should write it in the macedonian naming dispute page, and that's what i'm going to do. also, you deleted my disambiguation edit which was right and also didn't answer why you delete it.i did no edit war simply because nobody explained why i was wrong till got a block notification and i STOPPED the "edit war" -Revert-warring on article talkpage to keep polemic off-topic material that had been speedily archived per long-standing practice on that page: [80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87] there is no guideline that allows "admins" to delete(call it by its name,delete,not archive!) talk whenever they want.it is not article edit,it's talk edit! you are completely arbitrary and censoring me.see what i've written here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Macedonian_language&oldid=482165206 -Revert-warring on another related talkpage: [88][89][90] the same here.deleting my talk whenever they can't answer it Threatens to keep reverting forever: [91][92] how is referring the reasonable reason of why i will continue editing a threat? maybe it is a threat for future perfect's macedonism but not generally a threat. -Threatens to resort to canvassing: [93] ""following wikipedia policy"? and what policy says you can remove posts whenever you like from talk pages? pleeeeasssseeee don't try to pass this BS TO ME . i am now here and will call other greeks too, we'll not tolerate the suppression of greek statement." i didn't call anybody to troll, i called only to state opinions. if this is canvassing, signing petitions is also canvassing. the block sequence is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&oldid=482197942#Result_concerning_.E2.80.8EFrizstyler
i also wrote this mail to wiki help desk: user Frizstyler hello and first excuse me for my bad english. i'll make it short. ok since 2009 i've witnessed this issue been going on in pages MACEDONIAN LANGUAGE and REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA. i am now back here as an editor and went on to do some small edit on the first of these pages 2 days ago. they reversed my change and then i saw i'd made some minor mistake by inexperience so i corrected it and re-changed the page. but they kept reverting me for some times. then i stopped and went to talk page to discuss the changes,making some pretty existing claims.i discussed in the second page as well without touching it. NOBODY answers. all they do is delete on demand.and accusing me of being out of guidelines everywhere. after some research,apparently these same trolls (mainly "future perfect at sunrise" ,who now managed to block me,and "Taivo") have been doing this since 2009 and are pretty high in hierarchy, developed in some kind of discipline masterfully banning hundreds others since 2009 in these balkan-related issues,on this website, which though every year claims it's supporting objectivity and all opinions being shown.and i mostly have faith in this. obviously these people have some interests behind them. they obviously forward their "makedonija" propaganda in wikipedia. the pages with my sayings r here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Macedonian_language&oldid=482165206 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Republic_of_Macedonia&oldid=482165117 ( both deleted) here they accuse me of canvassing because i tell fellows to come and support me as i am about to get blocked, and threatening to block me for personal attacks while i'm telling them they mess up the site and this won't pass. i also say i will reopen the decision discussions about these 2 pages and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia, and user CMDsays some commitee has decided and i cant do anything???(more commitees) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise finally my talk here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Frizstyler these people addressed me to some arbitrary commitee(may be themselves ,lol) with swift processes & using the guidelines as lawyers,and although i managed to respond that comittee BANNED ME FOR ARBITRARY BEHAVIOR(???????) AND POV PUSHING WITHOUT ADDRESSING WHAT IN MY CLAIMS IS WRONG EITHER!! WHAT? TALKING IN TALK PAGE AND TALKING ABOUT CHANGES IS ARBITRARY AND POV PUSHING ETHNICISM(as they say)?see arbitration "talk" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Frizstyler
i've taken enough of this. if you ask me, every discipline grown in wikipedia should be cleared out of the way if you want to keep it real,at least wherever disputes are involved. im not sure who i m talking to ,hope not the same faces. i adress to you cause you're the only left to be neutral. all i ask for is unblocking me and letting me re-open the issues to continue discussion. and please consider doing something about these arbitrary "ultimate" disciplines who've grown to be the most arbitrary themselves Frizstyler (talk) 09:22, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You will not get yourself unblocked by (a) being abusive to others who have already acted/commented here, or (b) continuing the content argument in your unblock request. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:46, 6 April 2012 (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.
- I have also reviewed all of your edits this year, and I see nothing but aggressive nationalism that is in blatant violation of WP:ARBMAC resolutions, together with edit-warring, soap-boxing, etc. Your block is quite proper, and if you continue with the aggression here on your Talk page, you are likely to lose the ability to edit it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
that's an answer?back to elementary. when you answer, you answer to all my points. if you can't even answer 1, unblock me already. you keep talking about nationalism. i support the truth.answer if you can. no nationalism,contrary to those admins, that group of gruevski folks who push propaganda here and vote admins each other. if you want, i have links generally about admins being out of space. you don't allow others to edit. not even talk about edits. take criticism and don't avoid it all the time by accusing me an extremist. also, what are you talking about aggresive edits,i have almost never edited before. i once edited some link,and it was removed like right away.(how new)--Frizstyler (talk) 17:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
- We don't unblock people who are obviously unrepentant nationalist trolls. In any case, admins can not unilaterally overturn Arbitration enforcement blocks, meaning they couldn't unblock you even if you were making arguments more profound than "Yes, I'm a nationalist, but so are they!". Also, I have absolutely no stake in the present state of articles on Wikipedia, except to make sure that abusive editors are prevented from keeping their changes in. I could care two whits less about all the ethnopolitical areas on Wikipedia, and part of it is because of people like you who see red whenever a specific word comes up in conversation. Accusing me of trying to push propaganda is not the smartest move when my talkpage explicitly notes I do not edit pages on (ethno)political topics or areas under Arbitration Committee sanction (as in this case). The only way you will get unblocked is to email the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Sub-Committee, and if your demeanor is the same as it is now, I can guarantee the request will be rejected out of hand. I understand this is something you're passionate about. Know that we don't give two dingleberries and a McShitall about your extremism on Wikipedia as far as this topic is concerned. Zebedee's warning above is not an idle one - keep screaming "favoritism", "sideways racism" "ethnicism" or what have you and your talk page privileges will be revoked. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
you guys keep on not answering any of all my points and accusing me of ethnicism(since when is ethnicism based on truth a bad thing anyway? maybe you're too underknowledged to be doing all this). you are desperate for not letting me edit.the mistake i made putting that greek opinion in an irrelevant page,i said,is not gonne be repeated. i don't understand a single reason why i'm blocked here. you're not gonna get anywhere with this. also,jeske couriano,my accusations about professional propagandists did not refer to you.--Frizstyler (talk) 11:27, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- There is no obligation for anyone to answer any of your points, because this forum is not for carrying on your nationalist arguments (even if you believe they are based on "the truth"). And as for "you're not gonna get anywhere with this", I really don't know where you think "we" are "trying to get". It is you who is blocked, and if you want to be unblocked, it is you who needs to "get somewhere". It's really quite simple - if you make an unblock request that satisfies a reviewing administrator that you will stop your nationalist POV editing, your request can be discussed by the community, and if you don't, it can't. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:38, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- Just to clarify. As it explains in the block notice, an individual admin cannot unblock you without seeking a consensus first (at, for example, WP:ANI), and nobody is going to take it to a discussion unless you make a convincing unblock request in the first place. So you need to drop the stick and make the kind of assurances that would persuade an admin to start an unblock discussion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:45, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
i'm talking about my points here on being unblocked. see?you are constantly avoiding everything i say. I SAID I HAVE NO "NATIONALIST"/EXTREMIST POV.I'VE WRITTEN WHY. answer my points or don't answer at all. well,actually future perfect and floquenbaum are the ones who should answer. where you are trying to get is finding an excuse to keep censoring me. get real. or,if you are uneducated(which you probably are,considering ethnicism a negative thing), just dump this site and let scholars with actual names and lifes do the job.--Frizstyler (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- For continuing to be abusive to others and not addressing the reasons for your block, I have revoked your ability to edit this Talk page. If you wish to make any further unblock appeals, please see WP:BASC -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)