What!? I've been blocked for that! No warning? I mean, I didn't violate it again! Oh well, I'll have to wait then, I guess. Dora Nichov 08:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

unblock reviewed 1=OK... where should I start? Oh, all right, I did threaten that vandal, but it was only for helping Wikipedia! If you look through my contributions, you'll find that my edits are usually for the good of Wikipedia. I mean, it's just pretty unjust that you block me but not the offending vandal. It's also unjust you block someone for their, er, "good intentions". Fine, I agree not to threaten anyone, including vandals, in the future all right? Can't anyone give me just one last chance? Thanks. And feel free to block me if I threaten anyone else but just unblock me this once. Please? Yours hopefully, Dora Nichov

decline=I'm provisionally declining this for now only to remove it from the category. I have contacted Viridae here. Due to the serious reasons behind the block, this may take some time. Please be patient. Thank you. I have this page watchlisted and you are also welcome to e-mail me if I don't respond for a couple of days.-- Kchase T 10:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, per conversation with Viridae, I've reduced this block to two months. As the situation stands, I'm disinclined to reduce it futher. Even though I believe these two comments Plus I'll kill you if you vandalize my userpage again., and Stupid vandal, I'll kill you the way I kill moose!) were not meant seriously, it's impossible to know how the people they were directed at interpreted them. For that reason, I am treating the situation seriously, even if I don't think you ever had any serious intention of killing anyone for vandalism of your wikipedia userpage. If you're willing to do a few things (such as agreeing to strike the comments and apologize on the IP talk pages) I'd be willing to entertain reducing the block to the original two weeks.-- Kchase T 18:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

OK then. Dora Nichov 11:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't do that right now as I'm not allowed to edit (this is obvious) but I'll do it first thing after the block expires, no matter if it's two months to two weeks. Dora Nichov 11:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I saw your message on Viridae's talk page and I just want to thank you. Dora Nichov 11:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.-- Kchase T 13:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

A small heads up... Dora Nichov is now editing under anonymous IP (and not being very clandestine about it, either). See the relevant talk page and the contribution page. Of course, there may be other IPs which he is using to edit as well. Denn333 15:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... You seem to be enjoying your "revenge" a lot, Denn333. I've promised no threatening, and I'm trying my best not to do so, so there. Dora Nichov 01:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

You guys also seem to froget I do more good than harm. Dora Nichov 01:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

It's kind of like trying to exterminate a weasel, if you know what I mean. Dora Nichov 02:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I mean, two months, most vandals just get like two days! Huh. So the disruptive vandals get only two days in prison while someone that does mostly good gets two months!? Very logical, yeah right. Dora Nichov 02:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Any vandal that gives death threats will be indef blocked if they are using an account or given a long term anon only block if they are using an IP. Because of your good record barring this incident you have had your block shortened to 2 months, however you still gave death threats, something that is extremly frowned upon within the community. If you continue to try and evade the block, the block will be continually be reset. And I am quite willing to file a checkuser request to find out if you are evading. Sit back, wait for your block to run out so you can resume editing and don't make any further death threats once you can edit. If you continue to evade, the block will be continually reset so you won't be able to edit under this username. As it is, this most recent evasion has added a day or so to the length of the block. Viridae ^Talk 02:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Listen, just because I did one bad edit doesn't mean all my edits are bad. There's no reason to rv all those edits I made under my IP address. I tried not to threaten anyone, so would you guys just leave me alone? Blocking, reverting my edits and all that stupid treatment, and I'm not even a vandal! You are so... wait... no personal attacks, right? Fine, but if someone does good and is punished more than a vandal, it's REALLY unjust, it really is. That's what I've been trying to say. Dora Nichov 02:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The reason various admins blocked you for two weeks to indefinitely is because death threats are much more serious than simple vandalism. Furthermore, resetting a block or extending a block for evasion is well supported by policy. See WP:BLOCK#Evasion_of_blocks. Please don't do it again, or I will extend the block myself.-- Kchase T 13:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

To me, death threats and otherwise harsh language usually communicate that a user has a more basic problem--either being too posessive or needing attention (or both). I don't think that attention is your problem, but maybe you need to think about how posessive you are. And, for the record, it's not about revenge... it's about being able to enjoy Wikipedia. Your ban, frankly, is breath of fresh air for me and several other users who have felt tortured from time to time by your behavior, which seems to have climaxed in the death threats and the ban. Denn333 18:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

(x-posted to User talk:Denn333) Denn333, I'll be blunt. Reporting the IP editing was fine and further good-faith reports to any administrators' talk page or an appropriate channel are welcome. But telling a blocked user what their supposed problem might be is quite simply not your place, especially when you've apparently had prior conflict with the editor in question. This smacks of baiting. Please stop it.-- Kchase T 20:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I was accused of getting revenge (see his remark to me above). I had the right to respond and said my piece. Thanks. Denn333 00:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the current threats still hanging around on the IP talk pages and was going to revert them, but decided to check here to see if something was going on about them. I notice that the user has agreed to get rid of the threats and apologize as soon as the block is over, but that leaves the threats hanging around for the remainder of the block, however long it is at this point. Is there any sort of compromise that can be worked out? Like someone else removes the threats so that they aren't there for the remainder of the block and the user apologizes when the block is up? Or if it's really important for the user to be the one to do it, is it possible to give the user a temporaty partial block, as in block the user from everything except the pages that the user is supposed to clean-up? Like community service? And then go back to a full block once the community service is done? Two months is an awfully long time to leave threats lying around... Miss Mondegreen | Talk   23:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Just remove them yourself. Viridae ^Talk 23:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. Threats/vandalism from: 68.164.83.246, 68.165.174.178, 75.36.119.190, 75.33.69.190, 125.164.190.191, which was everything mentioned on the ANI report. Miss Mondegreen | Talk   08:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Let me clarify something -- there's only threats, no vandalism. If there's anything I hate, it's vandalism, especially persistent, obviously untrue stuff. (See Animal Face-Off. Someone is currently vandalizing both that article and its talk page). You'd think someone like me is a vandal!? Dora Nichov 02:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm rescinding the offer to shorten the block, as I was unaware of the ANI thread and Jersey Devil's comment there and, to be frank, I don't know that you're taking this seriously enough to assure the community that it won't happen again in two weeks. I'm very sorry.-- Kchase T 12:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, I can wait, but I'm deadly serious. Even when I evaded the block I didn't threaten anyone, so why did Viridae say I did? As for Denn333, I want a breath of air as much as you do, but we can't come to a conclusion. Let's talk after my block has expired, all right? Dora Nichov 06:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say you threatened someone while evading your block, i reset the block for evading the first one. Viridae ^Talk 06:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK. I misunderstood your message. Dora Nichov 07:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and do I have a problem? Not really, unless you count persistent vandals and bad edits (er, not mine). Dora Nichov 06:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll wait though...*starts wiggling uncontrollably in chair* Dora Nichov 06:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

And I suppose I'm pretty lucky as most in this situation get an indefinite block but I only get two months. Dora Nichov 06:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, Denn333, you say several users are tired of me? Of the many users I've talked with, only you have a distinct aversion to me, I get along fine with most others. If any arguments occur, they're solved swiftly, only your case hasn't been solved yet. Dora Nichov 11:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

If you have any problem, it's that you took the vandalism too personally. Read the blocking section of User:Mindspillage/admin if you're so inclined. It's directed at admins, but it changed my perspective long before I was a sysop. Vandalism can get worse, but taking it personally is usually counterproductive. The best move is typically to give the templatized warning and move on. If you can't let vandalism slide, then it's usually a good idea to take a break before you say something that we have to block you for.-- Kchase T 21:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I do now. Dora Nichov 01:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I've found a vandal: 75.36.110.15. Too bad I can't do anything, so irritating! Dora Nichov 02:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Dora, I am tired of you and your reverts to the Walking with page (in reference to your post on this page at 11:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)). Walking with Cavemen is part of the Walking with Series. One producer wasn't there big whoop... Everyone else was still there and it still had the same kinds of goals as the other three Thegreyanomaly 06:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

No. In the WWM DVD there was a special about how they made the series. No mention of WWC. There's an encyclopedia with every animal in the series (well, not every animal, but there are most of the animals from WWM, WWD, WWB, TBOBA, CBD and SM). No WWC. And before you argue PP wasn't in any of those either, PP was made after both. Dora Nichov 08:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Walking with..., you will be blocked from editing. Thegreyanomaly 06:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

No, he won't be blocked simply for removing paragraphs, because he has explained why he disagrees. Other policies may be invoked if the dispute gets serious enough, but vandalism isn't one of them - see WP:ATWV. This is not a comment about who is right. Art LaPella 16:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Put this on your userpage! ----- Cuddly Panda ( talk · contribs) 01:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Hiya! I've smiled at you! -- Cuddly Panda 14:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! :D Dora Nichov 14:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• *Smiles* :P Seadragon34 8:54, 25 August 2007 (UTC)