Hi, Prüm. As you have been repeatedly told, the proper thing to do if you no longer stand by a comment you've made, while other people have responded to it, is to leave it on the page and strike it out using and . This is not some technical or bureaucratic requirement, but simply to avoid wrong-footing the people who have responded, and avoid confusing readers. I'm surprised to see you reject Sitush's requests, and to answer him like
this.
Also, you'd be wise to remove your new comment [1] before anybody comments on it. It's so offensive that a clerk may well remove it if you don't. Indeed, I'll bring it to a clerk's attention myself. Bishonen | talk 11:03, 3 May 2018 (UTC).
Well, either you're Grawp, or you're pretending to be. Either of those rates an indefinite block. Done. Bishonen | talk 15:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC).
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Bishonen |
talk 08:22, 4 May 2018 (UTC).
Prüm ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am neither Grawp nor JarlaxleArtemis and never wanted to be them or impersonate any of them. I also didn't desire to draw undue attention to myself when I said this, I was in a state of acute mental anguish, which has subsided now. Invoking Grawp was a last ditch attempt to prevent any further damage from occuring through disruptive editing with my account, which I believe happened because I was feeling myself lose my grip over reality. You may look into my editing history, which wasn't suspicious until the last week or so. I wish to contribute to improving myself and others again through editing enwiki the way I did before, and therefore politely ask to be unblocked. I had my main account on dewiki unblocked already and was never blocked on meta, having withdrawn the block request there in time. Prüm ( talk) 16:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I agree with Bishonen, above, that you should really appeal this directly to the Arbitration Committee - they might want to examine checkuser data and might want to ask you for personal information. And as this has apparently arisen from a personal crisis, I recommend keeping away from the public gaze as much as possible. As Bishonen says, the address to use is arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 18:02, 5 May 2018 (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.
After being tipped off by your Meta page, I've checked out your contributions to German Wikipedia, and I no longer find it at all likely that you have anything to do with Grawp. You have been unblocked. Happy editing! Bishonen | talk 08:27, 6 May 2018 (UTC).
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 30, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding German war effort articles has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee,
Hello, Prüm. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Prüm. As you have been repeatedly told, the proper thing to do if you no longer stand by a comment you've made, while other people have responded to it, is to leave it on the page and strike it out using and . This is not some technical or bureaucratic requirement, but simply to avoid wrong-footing the people who have responded, and avoid confusing readers. I'm surprised to see you reject Sitush's requests, and to answer him like
this.
Also, you'd be wise to remove your new comment [1] before anybody comments on it. It's so offensive that a clerk may well remove it if you don't. Indeed, I'll bring it to a clerk's attention myself. Bishonen | talk 11:03, 3 May 2018 (UTC).
Well, either you're Grawp, or you're pretending to be. Either of those rates an indefinite block. Done. Bishonen | talk 15:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC).
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Bishonen |
talk 08:22, 4 May 2018 (UTC).
Prüm ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am neither Grawp nor JarlaxleArtemis and never wanted to be them or impersonate any of them. I also didn't desire to draw undue attention to myself when I said this, I was in a state of acute mental anguish, which has subsided now. Invoking Grawp was a last ditch attempt to prevent any further damage from occuring through disruptive editing with my account, which I believe happened because I was feeling myself lose my grip over reality. You may look into my editing history, which wasn't suspicious until the last week or so. I wish to contribute to improving myself and others again through editing enwiki the way I did before, and therefore politely ask to be unblocked. I had my main account on dewiki unblocked already and was never blocked on meta, having withdrawn the block request there in time. Prüm ( talk) 16:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I agree with Bishonen, above, that you should really appeal this directly to the Arbitration Committee - they might want to examine checkuser data and might want to ask you for personal information. And as this has apparently arisen from a personal crisis, I recommend keeping away from the public gaze as much as possible. As Bishonen says, the address to use is arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 18:02, 5 May 2018 (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.
After being tipped off by your Meta page, I've checked out your contributions to German Wikipedia, and I no longer find it at all likely that you have anything to do with Grawp. You have been unblocked. Happy editing! Bishonen | talk 08:27, 6 May 2018 (UTC).
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 30, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding German war effort articles has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee,
Hello, Prüm. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)