User talk:Tobias Conradi/2006 Kayah Li incident
admin right abuse
editplease undo your deletion of Kayah Li, which is not justified by WP:CSD Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Please familiarize yourself with WP:CSD A1. An infobox and a single line of text does not an article make. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Don't try to distract. Your deletion is not covered by WP:CSD Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- What's the distraction? I've restored a copy to your userspace at User talk:Tobias Conradi/Kayah Li if you'd like to take another shot at it, but this time avoiding the criteria for speedy delete of super short articles. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- I don't want a copy. Simply undo your abuse. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, since my actions were completely in-line with WP:CSD#Articles, I'll accept your apology now. Just fix the issue, write more, and keep going. Why fight about something like this? - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- They were not inline. Why fight? I am pissed of by speedy admin deletions. I create content and admins delete the stuff out of process. In this case I noticed the abuse, but maybe sometimes I don't. You can also write something more. Everybody can. I only came there because of a wrong link at Michael Everson#Work. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you feel that I have not acted properly, then feel free to request an external review of my actions. I have provided you with the text of the article (which met the CSD A1, btw) and suggested that you recreate it with enough expanded content to survive on its own merits. I'm not sure what else I can do, but if there's any other way I can help, please don't hesitate to ask. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Since you are ongoing to claim the deletion meets WP:CSD I think it is better you are banned from deleting by WP:CSD A1 at all. What else you can do? Undo the deletion. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- You are absolutely entitled to your opinion. If you feel you have been wronged, please seek redress through RfC or at WP:AN/I. If there's anything I can do to assist, let me know. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- For Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct#Use of administrator privileges I would need a second person that tried to resolve the dispute. I did invite one. It's a mess that admin right abuses are so difficult to stop. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- You are absolutely entitled to your opinion. If you feel you have been wronged, please seek redress through RfC or at WP:AN/I. If there's anything I can do to assist, let me know. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Since you are ongoing to claim the deletion meets WP:CSD I think it is better you are banned from deleting by WP:CSD A1 at all. What else you can do? Undo the deletion. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you feel that I have not acted properly, then feel free to request an external review of my actions. I have provided you with the text of the article (which met the CSD A1, btw) and suggested that you recreate it with enough expanded content to survive on its own merits. I'm not sure what else I can do, but if there's any other way I can help, please don't hesitate to ask. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- They were not inline. Why fight? I am pissed of by speedy admin deletions. I create content and admins delete the stuff out of process. In this case I noticed the abuse, but maybe sometimes I don't. You can also write something more. Everybody can. I only came there because of a wrong link at Michael Everson#Work. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, since my actions were completely in-line with WP:CSD#Articles, I'll accept your apology now. Just fix the issue, write more, and keep going. Why fight about something like this? - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- I don't want a copy. Simply undo your abuse. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- What's the distraction? I've restored a copy to your userspace at User talk:Tobias Conradi/Kayah Li if you'd like to take another shot at it, but this time avoiding the criteria for speedy delete of super short articles. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Don't try to distract. Your deletion is not covered by WP:CSD Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Tobias, please stop moving this to the Kayah Li talk page. It belongs here or on my page. I suggest we pick one and stick to it. Also, considering the subject matter, it would be inappropriate for you to continue deleting this thread from your talk page until we've resolved this. I've given you the sentence that was deleted in the link above and encouraged you to expand it into an article so it won't be deleted. Whether you do this or not is up to you. Please do not create single line/single sentence sub-stub articles that meet the WP:CSD A1. Thanks! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 18:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Tobias, see Kayah Li script and Rejang script. Sheesh, these guys. Evertype 18:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Tobias, Evertype's article above is a much better example of how something should look when it is starting out. Please note that it provides enough context for someone to understand what the subject is. I hope you find a positive example in it. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 19:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Tobias, see Kayah Li script and Rejang script. Sheesh, these guys. Evertype 18:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Tobias, this belongs on either your or chairboy's talk page. Move it to article space one more time and you will be blocked for disruption. pschemp | talk 19:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Block
editYou have been blocked for 24 hours for disruption for repeated moving this discussion to article space where it does not belong after being told many times by more than one person. pschemp | talk 19:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- And for continuing the dispruption by removing the conversation after you were blocked, your page has been protected and your block extended to 48 hours. Tobias, just for once, you should try to get along with people. Btw, I'm putting an unlbock notice here because I'm a nice person and I'm sure you want one so you can complain about admin abuse. pschemp | talk 19:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- The following is a false statement, I did not asked to be unblocked. See:
- Tobias Conradi (Talk) 12:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Tobias Conradi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
unfairly blocked
Decline reason:
I've reviewed your block and it seems you were given more than enough warning about your disruption. Why dont you use this time thinking of how to expand your article so it isnt deleted next time? Request respectfully declined --- GIen 19:49, 2 September 2006 (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.
---html code of the block box----