This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Playin' solitare till dawn with a deck of fifty one
I will do the citeweb thing asap, right now I have to go to work; hopefully I will be able to work on it later this evening. Cheers. J.delanoygabsadds 19:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Good reasoning. 'Being a dick for doing the same thing' What exactly did I do, John Reaves? The first revert was bogus. I named my page the 'Doucheblog' a long time ago. It includes copying people's funny quotes and random essays. But this ego-maniac thinks I am being slanderous to him. I doubt running my mouth is going to get me unblocked, my hope is some out there can look at this situation objectively. And I still want my page to be titled to 'Doucheblog' without John Reaves catching hard feelings.
Decline reason:
Just stop that blog nonsense. WP:NOT#BLOG, and WP:NOT for posting weird stuff inquiring about the mothers of others. — Sandstein (talk) 21:17, 22 January 2008 (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.
Crowing (cooing) is associated with strutting and fighting in cock (male) birds.
I never thought "DOUCHEBLOG" was aimed at me, it just isn't acceptable user page content. John Reaves 21:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I never altered anyone's words. I merely felt an injustice was done and wanted to preserve that. If I had added my own commentary or changed people's words, then I would understand. I admitted I was wrong in the personal attacks towards that other guy above, but still feel I was wronged in this entire incident. If you review my record, I'm a constructive editor without a single blemish on my records - save this past week. --EndlessDan 21:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Then perhaps you should have kept it that way by not delving into incivility, personal attacks and violating our BLP. John Reaves 21:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
For copying and pasting of what I felt strongly was an injustice? My personal space bothered John Reaves that much? Get off your high horse, dick. There's your incivility, personal attack and BLP. Ya know, instead of memorizing those rules, maybe you should find a girlfriend or just a friend. Yes? --EndlessDan 21:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You have received this message because you are on the invite list, you may change your invite options via that link. BrownBot (talk) 21:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
same person?
I am shocked to see your name as among the blocked! Weren't you running for ArbCom? I have to log off but I will return to see what is going on. Archtransit (talk) 21:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I'm such an idiot that I can't make any sense of the doucheblog so I can't help you. Archtransit (talk) 21:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Stay tuned. --EndlessDan 21:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I took the liberty of posting on John Reave's talk page asking him to leave you be. Stop dude, just stop. Your last post to him is an attack and I'm tired of you showing up in my watchlist. Don't let the man drag you down. You've successfully called each other names now, including a dick being thrown in both directions, and you need to just chill out man. Don't ruin a good week. WP:TROUT. Keeper | 76 21:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Your right. I was wrong in some of the things I have said to John Reaves, I have no problem admitting that. However, I feel like he is abusing his adminship privileges.
But now, let's not get crazy and think this can come close to bringing down a friggin awesome week. It's only Wikipedia. --EndlessDan 21:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
An editor (not me) has nominated User:Endlessdan/pizza for deletion. I'm not sure what's going on, and I suggested that MFD is not the best way to deal with this situation. I was trying to figure out what's going on and I noticed that you appear not to have even been notified, nor was the subpage tagged. Just wanted to notify you. --JayHenry (t) 21:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. Orange Mike was my road dawg, too!--EndlessDan 13:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. But I still don't know what personal attack there is to remove. This portion of the user page was copied from WP:ANI and unaltered. I did not add my own commentary to the text, I just saved a time line of the events that occured.
I actually plan on saving all the events that transpired in the last day, as well. The only thing one could consider a personal attack would be my edit summaries but those do not transfer on a copy and paste job. And if someone out there has the power to edit those, they may do so. --EndlessDan 17:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I would testify in a court of law that I believed I notified you, Dan! Don't know what went wrong; apologies for the whole mess. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
That's cool Mike, your still my road dawg. --EndlessDan 17:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Block extended
For making egregious personal attacks here, I have blocked you for 48 hours. Please be advised that such conduct is not tolerated on Wikipedia. Sandstein (talk) 21:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
John Reaves called Endlessdan a "dick" in his block summary here. Is that being taken into consideration, not as condoning Dan's behavior, but perhaps understanding his response? Everyone needs to step away from the ledge. Poking a bear in the corner does not calm down the bear. Keeper | 76 21:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree; that block comment was inappropriate and I've advised John of that. That does not, however, excuse this user's conduct in any way. Sandstein (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
That's my darling Keeper. He grins like a baby but bites like a gator. --EndlessDan 13:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
There are two thousand, three hundred and twenty-two blocks in my walls.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I promise to be nice. Isn't there a work-release program?
Decline reason:
Work release program details below.— Addhoc (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2008 (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.
This request for unblocking has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:
Click edit this page on that article and scroll down past the message informing you of your block.
Copy the source of that article and paste it to the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: = [[Article title]] =) and save the page before you improve it.
Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.
If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{helpme|your question here}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Addhoc (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
LoL, awesome. --EndlessDan 18:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Seriously? a template? How is that helpful, Addhoc? Keeper | 76 18:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
LoL, I thought the same thing. It's fine. It was actually pretty funny and I didn't realize they had that particular template. --EndlessDan 18:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad to see you laughing again. When does your block expire? (knowing full well that I or anyone else will not be unblocking you). When it does, please don't pipelink other user's names with words like dick, douche, etc, especially not in edit summaries where they can't be removed. You're making it really hard to defend you. Cheers, dude. 11 days and counting to the showdown! Keeper | 76 18:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It expires tomorrow afternoon. I still got have about another 24 hours to go. I'm glad you stepped in when you did because I was cooking up a doozy of a reply that probably would have blocked me for a lot longer then 48 hours. To be honest with you, the last week has been my most interesting week on Wikipedia to date. Please don't think for a minute that I have been affected by any of the events, a little disenfranchised by the actions taken by some of the users, but there is nothing that can be said or done on Wikipedia that really put a damper on my week. Especially this week. It's Wikipedia. I look at it as a fun, enriching and sometimes rewarding hobby. I am amazed that this all started from me calling some broadSkeletor.
Thanks for putting your neck out there, man. You didn't have to and I appreciate that. In Jersey, what you've done for me would make you a capo. And I promise I will not call John Reaves any a dick, a douche or even a cunt. --EndlessDan 21:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
PS:
NYG: 30
PATS: 28
Oh and if you have some time, take a look at this. This guy is long overdue. I'll let you come to your own conclusion, but check it out. --EndlessDan 21:18, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Please fix this article. Just look at the formatting. --EndlessDan 17:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Also a user is adding weird stuff to Labradoodle. He added a link to a hacker website under the guise of labradoodle pics.--EndlessDan 17:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Speedy delete this nonsense.--EndlessDan 17:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
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.
Hmm, I did mean every word of that. I guess I will finish my sentence. But hey, don't fix the articles above. Leave em as is and wait for someone else to find em. Your getting a barnstar when I'm unblocked.--EndlessDan 18:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
