I have advised Wikipedia administrators of your comments. Denisarona ( talk) 13:50, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 13:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. Chillum 14:14, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
LPhnx ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Your reason here LPhnx ( talk) 15:49, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
reasoning below. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 17:17, 18 July 2015 (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.
.
It is curious that Wikipedia is so prompt at triggering repressive mechanisms prior to reviewing the object of eventual contention.
Firstly, I have addressed a contemplation of a legal challenge towards, not wikipedia, but one of its contributor. It does not constitute a formal legal threat neither to Wikipedia nor the contributor. In that respect, I do not find myself having to justify a levy of unesserary sanctions that Wikipedia has imposed upon my action which in part reflects my enjoyment of freedom of speech in full observance with international law and Wikipedia terms and conditions.
Secondly, in lieu of sanctions, I would have assumed that Wikipedia would have carefully reviewed the content and the editing of its contributor. In light of my appreciation, I sincerely believe that the content in question is inappropriate, historically flawed, discriminatory and contrary to the expertise and views expressed by the highest French authorities.
Thirdly, I must stressed that effectively, Wikipedia may be subjecting itself to be challenged should it permits such content to be provided to the public.
LPhnx ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Your reason here LPhnx ( talk) 18:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Huon ( talk) 18:34, 18 July 2015 (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 appreciate both your legal commentary and interpretation, your concerns and the lecturing. I advise Wikipedia - an entity self-purposively of public interest- to revise the related section "Muslim Tensions" that is to be found under "History of France", which may arguably incitate racial hatred, be harmful, subjective, historically inaccurate and discriminatory. Regards.
I have advised Wikipedia administrators of your comments. Denisarona ( talk) 13:50, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 13:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. Chillum 14:14, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
LPhnx ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Your reason here LPhnx ( talk) 15:49, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
reasoning below. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 17:17, 18 July 2015 (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.
.
It is curious that Wikipedia is so prompt at triggering repressive mechanisms prior to reviewing the object of eventual contention.
Firstly, I have addressed a contemplation of a legal challenge towards, not wikipedia, but one of its contributor. It does not constitute a formal legal threat neither to Wikipedia nor the contributor. In that respect, I do not find myself having to justify a levy of unesserary sanctions that Wikipedia has imposed upon my action which in part reflects my enjoyment of freedom of speech in full observance with international law and Wikipedia terms and conditions.
Secondly, in lieu of sanctions, I would have assumed that Wikipedia would have carefully reviewed the content and the editing of its contributor. In light of my appreciation, I sincerely believe that the content in question is inappropriate, historically flawed, discriminatory and contrary to the expertise and views expressed by the highest French authorities.
Thirdly, I must stressed that effectively, Wikipedia may be subjecting itself to be challenged should it permits such content to be provided to the public.
LPhnx ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Your reason here LPhnx ( talk) 18:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Huon ( talk) 18:34, 18 July 2015 (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 appreciate both your legal commentary and interpretation, your concerns and the lecturing. I advise Wikipedia - an entity self-purposively of public interest- to revise the related section "Muslim Tensions" that is to be found under "History of France", which may arguably incitate racial hatred, be harmful, subjective, historically inaccurate and discriminatory. Regards.