Why I hell's name should I write in English about a Dutch case at the Dutch Wikipedia at the Dutch Arbitragecommissie? Do we also ask all British/American visitors to write in Dutch at wp:nl? -- Borvo ( talk) 14:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ti-Château, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roman ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I have already warned you once.
Since that warning, you have made multiple edits on other user talk pages discussing your dispute with Wikiklaas. I'll say this once, with emphasis: this is not a case for the English Wikipedia. We are not here to facilitate the continuation of your disagreements. So, I'll say it again - if you continue discussing this on the English Wikipedia, I will remove your editing privileges. If you have any questions about how to edit constructively, feel free to ask. Regards, m.o.p 15:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Enough is enough. I've given you multiple chances, but yet all you seem to be interested in is provoking other editors (namely, myself) and digging up your nl-wiki history on this project. You've been asked to drop the issue multiple times, and yet you've insisted on being combative.
If you'd like to make an unblock request detailing how you will attempt to make constructive contributions, avoid edit-warring, abstain from using sockpuppets and avoid disrupting in general, then we'll deal with that accordingly. Otherwise, don't continue banging your war drum or I'll have to remove talk page access as well.
To any uninvolved administrators: please note that Borvo has a long history of disruption on the Netherlands-language version of Wikipedia, where he has been blocked indefinitely. I've conversed with multiple stewards from that project and they've agreed that he should not have editing privileges as long as he continues to act in this manner.
m.o.p 06:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Borvo ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Sockpuppetry: I didn't commit it here, but as Mathonius told you at wp:nl, I am not to be trusted, so I advise you a CU. Disruptive editing: that's your claim, but I'll stop it. The ARBCOM-case ended, so I have no reason to continue it (and I won't continue it, I promise). Edit-warring: WP:BITE, everyone was once new here and made stupid faults. I already stopped edit-warring. Constructive contributions: see my user page, I already dìd constructive contributions (though no-one is interested in them). I will continue writing articles about the Hotton area.
Decline reason:
Per comment below. — Daniel Case ( talk) 18:55, 10 April 2013 (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.
Hi, I had similar problems with false accusations and slander on the Dutch version. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciaal:Bijdragen/2A02:A03F:167D:5900:9545:E113:D6E0:D450 https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overleg_gebruiker:2A02:A03F:167D:5900:91C:E987:CE00:52CA censuring comment pages etc... Terrible. The english version looks much more correct.
See here how factual comments were destriyed by Moira Moira etc.. 2A02:A03F:1696:6700:ACAA:588D:D11F:5295 ( talk) 13:53, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Why I hell's name should I write in English about a Dutch case at the Dutch Wikipedia at the Dutch Arbitragecommissie? Do we also ask all British/American visitors to write in Dutch at wp:nl? -- Borvo ( talk) 14:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ti-Château, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roman ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I have already warned you once.
Since that warning, you have made multiple edits on other user talk pages discussing your dispute with Wikiklaas. I'll say this once, with emphasis: this is not a case for the English Wikipedia. We are not here to facilitate the continuation of your disagreements. So, I'll say it again - if you continue discussing this on the English Wikipedia, I will remove your editing privileges. If you have any questions about how to edit constructively, feel free to ask. Regards, m.o.p 15:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Enough is enough. I've given you multiple chances, but yet all you seem to be interested in is provoking other editors (namely, myself) and digging up your nl-wiki history on this project. You've been asked to drop the issue multiple times, and yet you've insisted on being combative.
If you'd like to make an unblock request detailing how you will attempt to make constructive contributions, avoid edit-warring, abstain from using sockpuppets and avoid disrupting in general, then we'll deal with that accordingly. Otherwise, don't continue banging your war drum or I'll have to remove talk page access as well.
To any uninvolved administrators: please note that Borvo has a long history of disruption on the Netherlands-language version of Wikipedia, where he has been blocked indefinitely. I've conversed with multiple stewards from that project and they've agreed that he should not have editing privileges as long as he continues to act in this manner.
m.o.p 06:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Borvo ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Sockpuppetry: I didn't commit it here, but as Mathonius told you at wp:nl, I am not to be trusted, so I advise you a CU. Disruptive editing: that's your claim, but I'll stop it. The ARBCOM-case ended, so I have no reason to continue it (and I won't continue it, I promise). Edit-warring: WP:BITE, everyone was once new here and made stupid faults. I already stopped edit-warring. Constructive contributions: see my user page, I already dìd constructive contributions (though no-one is interested in them). I will continue writing articles about the Hotton area.
Decline reason:
Per comment below. — Daniel Case ( talk) 18:55, 10 April 2013 (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.
Hi, I had similar problems with false accusations and slander on the Dutch version. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciaal:Bijdragen/2A02:A03F:167D:5900:9545:E113:D6E0:D450 https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overleg_gebruiker:2A02:A03F:167D:5900:91C:E987:CE00:52CA censuring comment pages etc... Terrible. The english version looks much more correct.
See here how factual comments were destriyed by Moira Moira etc.. 2A02:A03F:1696:6700:ACAA:588D:D11F:5295 ( talk) 13:53, 20 June 2017 (UTC)