Contents

User talk:Sport and politics

Please do not remove or edit parts of this talk page as per WP:TPO. Drawing particular attention to the following:

Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning....Cautiously editing or removing another editor's comments is sometimes allowed, but normally you should stop if there is any objection.

This is Sport and politics's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 360 days

The following editors are not welcome to comment on this talk page. Any comments left by the following editors will be closed without hesitation, and not responded to. This is formal notification of an avoidance of deliberate interaction with the individual users listed below.

• John
• El cid, el campeador
• Martinevans123
• Specifico
• SchroCat
• Cassianto

Hi, Sport and politics. As you've stopped responding at AN/I, I'm just notifying you here that you've been formally issued a final and only warning via AN/I: All of Sport and politics comments and communications are to be in compliance with Wikipedia's civility policies and at all times - failure to do this will result in being blocked. Said warning was issued by Oshwah, and endorsed by Canterbury Tail, NeilN, and myself. Please see the AN/I thread for the full comments. Regards, Swarm ♠ 08:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:It seems any cabal of vested interests can group together and act like the mafia. Individuals making up nonsense and then going round making up their own rules. I firmly reject this "Only warning" Bullshit. I shall be looking at ways to appeal this pile of dog poo. I firmly stand by the comments which I made. and the other user was wholly sexist when quoting the dictionary, and being as ignorant as one can be. the apology was not sicncere, and i never asked for one.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive record. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this section.

I have removed the comments which appear to have caused the issues below. I apologise for making those comments, they are not made out of anything other than frustration, upset and disappointment. All I have ever wanted to do here is improve and write articles, it does though seem that I get to meet users who do so n an aggressive way, and have lots of other users who act just as aggressively around them. Maybe it is ,e, maybe it is them, maybe it is both of us. I just want to leave and com back later, It is likely to be months and potentially years. I may never come back, but All i want to do is walk away do some soul searching and potentially comeback at some future point. I am not in a great place myself, and in the future being on here could be something can have in my life. I would like to learn more when I come back, but now all I want to do is leave voluntarily. Sport and politics (talk) 14:13, 27 February 2018 (UTC) @Canterbury Tail:[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia for blatant violations of the warning given above. You were given a final warning and you chose to double down in response to it. As a result you've left me with no choice as it seems clear you're unwilling to abide by Wikipedia's civility policies and interact with other editors in a civil manner. Canterbury Tail talk 13:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If "[you] firmly stand by the comments which [you] made" then an indefinite block is entirely appropriate. As another editor observed in the ANI thread, a male editor making similar comments to a female editor would likely not received a warning, but have been immediately indefinitely blocked. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN:Those comments have been struck through and withdrawn, and I apologise for those comments. Sport and politics (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to walk away for a time, I can discuss with the blocking admin a reduction in the block length to say three months so you won't be tempted to come back before then. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But you still made those comments. This is the root of the problem, you keep making comments such as those and I can't shake the feeling right now that you're just saying what you think we want to hear for the time being. My concern isn't now, it's what happens if you come back and interact with other editors again as it seems any time you don't like something you drop into these civility issues. Based on the history of such comments, the repeated reports on ANI and what I've seen myself, I can't in good faith lift the block at this point, though I leave it to other admins to consider this. Canterbury Tail talk 14:29, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in agreement. In this case, the standard offer would apply I feel. Walk away for 6 months, come back and show that you really want to work in a collaborative environment, staying away from such comments that led to this block. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:46, 27 February 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm in the process of going on a long break from here, and I am very frustrated here by the whole situation which has been taken. I am unaware of why I have now for some reason been blocked forever. I think a block forever is over the top. I was always under the impression they would be incremental and not punitive. I would like to voluntarily leave Wikipedia, and go away from here, with the option of returning at some point one day. At the moment though It feels like a user who has been looking to throw me off the site has taken extreme action, and not been proportionate. I am not sure what the reason here is. I am in the process of walking away, and i am being attacked as I leave. If there is a need for a block all i ask for is some proportionality here. I just want to go away here, and I just want to have the option of one day coming back. if what I have said is in violation of something then I apologise for that, all i ask i am allowed to walk away for what may be a very long time, and could be forever. Sport and politics (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Cabal of vested interests? Well there's that. BTW your block is indefinite, not infinite. Continuing the same railing in your unblock request is hardly going to induce anyone to unblock you. As RickinBaltimore says, wait 6 months. See how you feel then. Request the WP:standard offer.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:53, 27 February 2018 (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.

•  Checkuser note: This is now a CheckUser block.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect WPNOTNEWS. Since you had some involvement with the WPNOTNEWS redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]