User talk:CENSEI/archive

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).

CENSEI (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

no reason given for my block ... is it a mistake?

Decline reason:

You are not currently blocked. Please see instructions below to check for an autoblock. You must follow these instructions exactly to help admins find the source of the problem. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
Try to edit the Sandbox.
If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-ip|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock-ip|...}}

NO NO. Please read and follow ALL Of the steps above. Don't just paste that template from above, read and follow ALL of the instructions, in order. It is important because if you don't do it exactly right, we can't help you fix this problem! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather people not know where I work, and dont want topost my IP. CENSEI (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then we cannot help unblock you. Sorry, but there is nothing we can do if you don't do this. If you are concerned, I can delete any evidence of your IP address once you have been unblocked, but unless we know what the problematic IP block is, we cannot fix it to allow you to edit. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I emailed the blocking admin with all the information. Hopefully that clears things up. CENSEI (talk) 18:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I got your email. The IP address you sent is NOT currently blocked, autoblocked, or rangeblocked. Please check to see if you still cannot edit. If you are still having trouble, please email unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org and reference this talk page. Please tell them EVERYTHING and EVERY DETAIL so that they can help unblock you. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Martin Luther King article[edit]

You were warned before about edit warring at that article: [1]. Please do not continue to edit war over the inclusion (or not) of the tags in the article. If you continue to do so, and especially if you continue to call the edits of those whom you disagree with vandalism, you may be blocked yet again for edit warring. If you are having trouble, please seek outside help to solve the problem, as described in WP:DR. Please not that being "right" is not an allowable reason for edit warring. So please do not continue to repeatedly force your version of an article on others. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP[edit]

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. -- Avi (talk) 19:50, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. CENSEI (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Che (film)[edit]

Please see the talk page for my comments. Thanks Redthoreau (talk)RT 15:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cyber stalking warning[edit]

You are bird-dogging all the edits I make, trying to provoke an edit war and then 3RR me. I can easily show this to an admin with the diffs. I suggest you stop doing it. Get a life. ► RATEL ◄ 01:50, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to do so if you think it is necessary, but as explained to me, your edit history is open for all to see for a reason, and its pretty clear that you don’t apply the criteria for inclusion in all the articles you edit. CENSEI (talk) 01:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll have to ask for an IP check. This is andyvphil redux. I see you started this account right after he was banned too. Hmmm. ► RATEL ◄ 02:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you'd better have better evidence than "I thin so", and it appears that Andyvphil is still editing so he was never banned. CENSEI (talk) 02:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 3RR[edit]

You were warned for reverting the article Matt Drudge repeatedly, a warning which you acknowledged receiving here: at 23:21 UTC. You reverted the article again here: one minute later. Sonce you show no signs of wishing to end the edit war, I have blocked you for a day. When your block expires, please do not return to edit war over this article, or you may be blocked again. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taunting at my talkpage[edit]

I have rolled back your taunting of Ratel at my talkpage. Please refrain from making any further such posts. H₂O Shipper 21:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 55 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Patrick Leahy. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 22:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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).

CENSEI (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I did not perfom a full revert with the edit. It was a partial revert without the disputed material included. I made it clear on the BLP talkpage that I would wait until a third part was able to look into the sources before I was going to do anything with it. This block is not justifiable

Decline reason:

You had fair warning, and rather than taking it as a lenient warning thought it rather an opportunity to get in another revert. It is not exactly a new offence for you. I remember your name as one of the users edit-warring on Drudge Report and Matt Drudge not too long ago. This is a problem in your behaviour I think you'll need to address quite soon. Moreover, your request does not in deal adequately with the reason for your block; just looks like an attempt to game your way out of it with little reassurances to anyone performing the unblock. So for these reasons I'm declining it. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Note to CENSEI - Hi CENSEI, a revert, according to this, is "...any action, including administrative actions, that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part..." (emphasis mine). Just thought I'd make that clear (I've also replied to your e-mail) in case you didn't know. But we'll leave it to the admin handling the unblock request. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 23:34, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban[edit]

Based on your history of abusing Wikipedia as a political battleground, your lengthy block log, and your record of edit-warring and disruption, I'm issuing a topic ban from articles and other pages relating to Barack Obama, loosely construed. The term of the topic ban is 6 months and violations will lead to blocks. I've logged this under the terms of the Obama article probation and posted it to WP:AN/I, where it can be reviewed by other administrators. MastCell ^Talk 05:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine my shock that the Obama-mob should deem me worthy to ban me from the holy one's articles. Unfortunately foe Wikipedia the current arbitration case wont put an end to this bullying. Its a shame. CENSEI (talk) 01:09, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If your buddy Dubya had used a teleprompter more often, maybe he would have sounded less like an idiot every time he spoke. Not everyone has the gift of gab, as the real messiah (Limbaugh) does. In fact, for all you know, Limbaugh might be reading too. He's on the radio, remember, so you can't tell. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ever think that comments like this cost you your adminship bid? One word : Orion ... our beloved president, The Boy Prince Chocolate Retard. CENSEI (talk) 22:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ask for the nomination, I merely consented to it, so it doesn't matter. And if Obama is a retard, then where does that place Bush? Probably at the IQ level of a salad bar. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I should point out that if I were an admin, you would be totally safe from any kind of action I might think is appropriate, because we've had words in the past. I would also curb my comments. So you were really better off if I had been approved. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am just quaking. CENSEI (talk) 01:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That fits. Another Republican icon, Richard Nixon, was a Quaker. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Always having to have the last word is a good indication of just how deep your narcissism and insecurity runs. I am sure that you got teased and picked on a lot when you were younger and this is what ...... some kind of do over for high school? Pretty sad little man .. pretty sad. CENSEI (talk) 02:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting theory. So what's your excuse for your behavior? And on the contrary, I'm over 6 foot, so I didn't get teased much (or more than once, anyway). And still on the contrary, I'm always willing to give the last word. Just like O'Reilly does. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm over 6 foot, so I didn't get teased much ROTFLOLMFAOOMT!!! Whatever fantasy you dream up for your online persona is just fine by me, but dont seriosuly think that you can pass off some kind of tough guy web warrior bravado. I just aint buying it and it makes you look pretty silly. CENSEI (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You continue to demean yourself with your comments. I expect better from our nation's finest. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, thanks for the sarcasm laden nock at the USN, much appreciated by me and the several hundred thousand sailors and Marines, you are a class act all the way. Here’s a tip Bugs: man up or shut up. Its easy to sound hard from your parents basement. CENSEI (talk) 19:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't even tell sincerity from sarcasm, so it's no wonder you can't tell POV-pushing from encyclopedic content - and that's your main problem here, not the liberals "taking over". Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeahhh ... right ... sincerity ... thats what yuo were going for. CENSEI (talk) 19:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I know I'm on a politics topic ban myself, but I'm posting this comment here per WP:IAR, because I feel a point needs to be brought up. How come, it seems, that the only people who receive political topic bans are conservatives? I have been harassed on-wiki and on the Wikipedia IRC channels for being conservative, and it is a disturbing, growing trend that conservatives are getting chastised for their opinions. This man is a member of the Navy, and he serves our country, and this is the kind of respect he gets for his great sacrifices? This is disgraceful. -Axmann8 (Talk) 17:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are conservatives on here that are not topic-banned, and there are liberals that have been blocked. And CENSEI being an honored member of our courageous military is a great thing for the USA and for him. It does not give him license to violate wikipedia policies. You would do well to seek out other conservative users (User:Collect and User:Kelly come to mind, although I might be wrong about them as I don't pay much attention to ideology as such) and pose that question. Opinions are not the problem. Behavior is the problem. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not ideologically conservative -- I am joyfully politically heretical <g> but I am conservative about how WP articles are written. It is, moreover, true that some appear to use their ideological positions here to determine how they view others, but I earnestly endeavor not to be in that group. Heck, I even get along with Bugs ... er ... Collect (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked those two to comment, in case I've put unwarranted words in their mouth. I would also point out that I'm on kind of a self-imposed topic ban on Obama-related articles, ever since the WND siege against the Obama page a few Sundays ago. Likewise with the Palin article, which was similarly besieged by liberals and gossip-mongers back in September. I think Kelly's still fighting that one, although you'd think it would have simmered down by now. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the things you said were unwarranted, such as calling this man a racist. All he did was call Obama a "chocolate messiah", and refer to him at TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States), which, personally, I agree 100% with. Obama can't speak without a teleprompter, and Obama chooses to make everything about race, calling his grandmother a "typical white person". If that's not offensive, I don't know what is. This man serves his country, and when he gives his opinion, he gets ridiculed. That is wrong on so many levels. -Axmann8 (Talk) 19:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Chocolate messiah" is a grade-A, 100 percent racist comment. I expect that from a sleazebag like Limbaugh. I expect better from members of our courageous military. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Save your outrage for the Rachael Maddow show. Obama is just as much a race hustling pimp as Jesse Jackson ever was. Ironic that they hate each other so much. CENSEI (talk) 19:19, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The notion that Jackson and Obama hate each other, assuming it matters, is another Limbaugh fantasy. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Axeman, its like this. A handful of editors have managed to gain control of all Obama related articles, that’s why they all read like a fucking campaign release. It doesn’t matter what they do as far as edit warring or personal attacks because just like when Scjessey was blocked for edit warring with me, one of his admin buddies (Seicer in that particular incident) will just come to his resuce and unblock him. CENSEI (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's like this - certain users (from all political spectra) think that wikipedia is a blog. It's not. And once you figure that out, you'll have a much better chance of success here. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, cause your recent thrashing at that RfAdminship shows you know how things work around here real good. CENSEI (talk) 19:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm told that I did quite well for a first-time candidate, especially one who dares to speak his mind and not kiss up. The voting revealed a great deal about the character of both the supporters and the opponents, and it was a useful exercise overall. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Landon1980 appears to be conservative and is not topic banned, as far as I know. I've asked him to comment here if he wants to. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 06:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fire and ice[edit]

Hey Censei. I hope you won't mind, but I reverted your addition to the ANI thread. I think it's best to step back and let the fire burn out rather than add fuel. I also noted in my edit summary that it wasn't the appropriate forum for issues that aren't directly related. There is an Arbcom on the Barack Obama article and I encourage you to participate there per your concerns. I have been following it, and am still deciding whether it's worth diff digging and such. Good luck. Have fun. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t mind, but I don’t think that Arbcom will solve anything as its become too much about what Stevevertigo did or didn’t do and not how egregious the peddlers of manufactured outrage have become. CENSEI (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you. But the world isn't perfect. Don't get baited into conflict (see above thread) and if you aren't enjoying the work you're doing on Wikipedia, work on different articles with different people or move on to another hobby. I sympathize with your concerns and frustration, censorship is wrong. But "we" have to pick our battles and you can't win them all, as the sayings go. Take care. I respect you for standing up for what is clearly a minority viewpoint here, and I encourage you not to provoke the drones. Make sure to do right even when provoked and badgered. :) Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You too. BTW, all I am doing with Bugs is setting the drag to zero so he can take as much rope as he can tear out of the reel to hang himslef. Seems to be working. CENSEI (talk) 19:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright since I've warned the other two participants in the above thread already: If you wish to discuss politics, there are many, many far better places to do it than Wikipedia. Please try to keep this to stuff that at least has a semblance to writing an encyclopedia. Regards, henrik•talk 20:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CENSEI and I are just funnin'. Just a couple o' good ol' boys havin' a few PBR's. 0:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeahhhh not so much. CENSEI (talk) 23:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What, you don't like PBR? Lemme guess: Rolling Rock. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a close replica of the basement where I spend all my free time. Note the server on the left. Just a little dusty. My high-speed internet cable runs across the top. I call it high-speed because the average cockroach can go from end to end in less than 20 seconds. On the right is my crude but effective telephone system. The shelf in the middle contains my collection of Minnesota Vikings Super Bowl rings. This is, indeed, a lot like my parents' basement, but don't tell them I told you - they think I left home years ago. Although I do overhear them asking why all the pop-tarts and the tofu keep disappearing. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]