Mr Gearloose
Welcome
edit
|
- Thank you, I have been around on the Swedish version for a while, so I can manage to some extent. Mr Gearloose (talk) 13:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
June 2011
editRegarding your comment on my User Talk page, please see WP:OUTING. Revealing any other Wikipedia user's real name is expressly prohibited, even in the case of banned or blocked users. The only exception is if that user has revealed their own real name on their User page. Regards, Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 21:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, I did not reveal anything new about former User:ScienceApologist that you cannot still find on many reverted edits, signed jps, leading to what I took for his real name, which he used before getting banned to edit indefinately. I will explain my motive in more detail on your talk page. Mr Gearloose (talk) 22:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
August 2011
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dougweller (talk) 17:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Mr Gearloose (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The block does not apply to my case. As for the outing it was not intentional and I was informed There was one only exception if the user had revealed his own real name on his User page, which was the case for this VanishedUser. And I have warned oter users about this here, so I am very anxious not to repeat it. As for User Kurtan, I am aware of his present situation here and have followed his edits at the Swedish wp for years and have several times been involved in the same conflicting issues on cosmology, where I share his ideas. I am not a frequent editor, and have been even lazier on the English due to language problems. Article edits I have usually someone more versed to check before saving. But this does not make me Kurtan! / Mr Gearloose (talk) 19:27, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Constructive editors don't out other editors. AGK [•] 22:09, 12 September 2011 (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.
Mr Gearloose (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Shit happens to an editor ignorant of the outing issue. I have no intention but to be a constructive one. Mr Gearloose (talk) 15:35, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Declined without review for use of profanity in the request. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:12, 30 September 2011 (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.
Mr Gearloose (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have no intention to use profanities either. The s-word with English pronounciation is used by most Swedish teen-aged females several times a day, and is no profanity here as might be the Swedish spelling and different sh-sound. I am sorry for this slip of my pen. So could we please return to constructive arguments. /Mr Gearloose (talk) 21:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Certainly can, waiting on you though. This doesn't address the reason for your block. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:01, 15 October 2011 (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.
Mr Gearloose (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
OK fine, I repeat my previous not reviewed ones: The block does not apply to my case. As for the outing it was not intentional and I was informed There was one only exception if the user had revealed his own real name on his User page, which was the case for this VanishedUser. And I have warned oter users about this here, so I am very anxious not to repeat it. As for User Kurtan, I am aware of his present situation here and have followed his edits at the Swedish wp for years and have several times been involved in the same conflicting issues on cosmology, where I share his ideas. I am not a frequent editor, and have been even lazier on the English due to language problems. Article edits I have usually someone more versed to check before saving. But this does not make me Kurtan! Ignorance of the outing issue does not imply I have no intention but to be a constructive editor. Besides a sockpuppet investigation (Gyro)Gearloose--Kurtan was done at the sv wp in May after an edit war on Cold fusion(Swedish version), IP check, but did not reveal any misuse in those 5 years. /Mr Gearloose (talk) 10:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I did not mean you should repeat your previously reviewed and declined requests. You are beginning to waste our time here; if you have no further constructive appeals to add to those you have already made, your talk page access will be removed. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:08, 16 October 2011 (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.
Mr Gearloose (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Yes, my time seems to be wasted as well, when you cannot accept that I am not abusing others account. Kurtan is an other person living in Stockholm 700 km from my place, whom I know by name and contacts from working in the same company. So adding to address the IP issue should be that I, when visiting the Stockholm head office, occasionally use computers there also for WP editing. Disclosing his real name is, as I have learnt out of the question, since it will invoke the “outing” ban. As for user Mariguld, a Japanese lady also in Stockholm and active on the sv wp, I have no idea who she is and to the links claimed. I have always tried to be constructive and will stay so. :) Mr Gearloose (talk) 07:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This truly does not address outing whatsoever. For example, vanished users may not be named by name or linked to their previous accounts in the manner you did. Your IP address issue is really not believable (you just happened to edit in 2 places 700km apart?) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:27, 23 May 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.
(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- May I suggest that the so convinced administrator explain in more detail how that could happen. Seems to me that there may well be two different editors involved, my guess in Stockholm and Åre respectively...¨) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.251.96.56 (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)