User talk:Ciaran306

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).

Ciaran306 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Those stupid comments were only added in because I wanted to see how often people read that page It was a suprisingly high number

Decline reason:

That's a plausible excuse for having vandalized once but you vandalized many times over the course of several days, and have virtually no other activity to your account. Mango juice^talk 15:15, 2 February 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.

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).

Ciaran306 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand why I was blocked and I am not that upset about it, I am only becoming a bit more active about it because there are some fallacies about O'Neill's Islands 1&2 being spheres when they were not, and the fact that people are completely ignoring that Admiral Akbar was almost assassinated, these are just a few of the positive contributiions I could make. Before the block were about 3 years of inactivity and I may slip back into that... but not while I am blocked. No!!! I shall fight for my rights!!!?!

Decline reason:

To avoid redundancy, I refer you to the comment below regarding your "rights." Beyond that:

Your request to be unblocked is declined because it does not address the reason for your block or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince administrators either (a) that the block was made in error or (b) that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again and you will make productive contributions instead. Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. —Travis ^talk 01:49, 8 April 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.

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).

Ciaran306 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please, I don't want to have to keep asking, but please, unblock me; I have already explained that I understand what happened, why I was blocked, and that i won't do it again. Why then am I continuing being blocked? What else can I say that could help my case? Free Speech may or may not be protected on the internet since it is a highly controversial topic; but that does not matter. What matters is that you are blocking someone who could give valuable input to your site. I am a person you do not want to make mad, you are making me mad, I am getting angry!

Decline reason:

Veiled threats do not incline me to unblock you. When editing Wikipedia, you will inevitably find yourself involved in disputes, and your unblock request suggests strongly that you are not able to deal with these conflicts professionally. Also, free speech on the internet as a whole is disputed, but on private websites, it is not. Wikipedia is privately owned and privately operated by the Wikimedia Foundation. The Wikimedia Foundation has allowed the respective projects to decide their own policies for dealing with issues, (within the WMF's overarching goals) and the English Wikipedia's community has given administrators broad power to use their own personal judgment to decide how to respond to various issues. While the Wikimedia Foundation has allowed pretty much anyone to change the pages on their sites, as a private organization, they have no obligation to do this. They have a legal right to ban anyone from any of their sites for any length of time for any reason, or even no reason at all. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 13:27, 28 April 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.

Free Speech

I suggest you read WP:FREESPEECH. You have no rights on wikipedia, editing here is a privilage.— Dæ dαlus^Contribs 01:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]