Contents

User talk:Eaglestorm

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Per the consensus at this ANI thread, I have blocked you indefinitely for personal attacks and incivility. This is a collaborative project on which civility is one of the five pillars; personal attacks and an almighty lack of good faith towards your fellow editors are not acceptable. I suggest you take some time out and come back with an unblock request when you feel you can edit here without attacking fellow editors. SamWalton (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

This is clearly another attempt at persecution and you people play along with them, nothing more than another act to legitimize the ruining of many years' hard work. You already blocked me before and you still couldn't leave enough alone. what ANI thread? that one where everyone tries to force various tenets of policy just to pull me down? Personal attacks and incivility... have I expressed any of that these past few weeks? Samwalton this block is not justifiable and since that notice went in effect, I have stayed away. I have been minding my own business and opening that ANI discussion is wrong to the point that I don't have to dignify it by joining there. this is not right. I'm very disappointed in you all. You don't want "attacks on other editors"? Stay the hell out of my way and that so-called "almighty lack of AGF" is a twisted way to legitimize putting me down. --Eaglestorm (talk) 12:43, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Wikipedia is not your personal property where others should avoid you if they don't want to be insulted (and yes, you have engaged in all kinds of personal attacks, ranging from unfounded accusations of bad faith to outright insults, over the past few weeks). Since you cannot even see why your behaviour is unacceptable, much less credibly claim to change it, I cannot unblock you. Huon (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2016 (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.

• HiEaglestorm, I see you're a long-term contributor to Wikipedia, and perhaps you're getting a bit stressed by the poor competence that characterizes a lot of the contributions here? I've been here for some time myself and I got burned out for similar reasons, and I found my temper was getting short and I had little tolerance for what I saw as the same problems over and over again. My solution was to hand in my admin bit and take a long time off - in fact, I intended never to return. But I still see enormous benefit in the project, and I'm back again and have even returned to admin duties. And those incompetent edits? Well, they have to happen, because it's new people every day who don't yet know how to contribute properly (and the barrage of Wikipedia polices can be quite daunting for a newcomer). Anyway, I'm not trying to tell you what to do, I'm just hoping that some thoughts from me might help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed Bilorv deleting personal attacks by an IP editor claiming I "got" what I supposedly deserved. I think I know who it i is: It's Whitmore8621, whose SPI reports I filed from September to October 2010 caught him redhanded. I have tracked down the IP and it's user history is more or less the same as that blocked editor. I know that due to my undeserved status, I can't file SPI reports again, but given that he's been editing on a lot of subjects he got hot water for before, he can't be let off the hook just because I'm out of the game. N--Eaglestorm (talk) 09:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]