User talk:Rovea

Archives

no archives yet (create)

Special schools

I endorsed the deletion because I believe it was correct. Everyone else except you who has commented so far also believes that it was correct. There is simply no point badgering people with numerous comments on their talkpages or on the DRV; I'm certainly not going to change my mind, and I doubt if they are either. Your comment "This was about inclusionist vs. deletionist. It has nothing to do with the content of the article. I don't know why everyone keeps saying this" indicates that you don't understand the concept of deletion and notability guidelines on Wikipedia. Please go and read WP:BEFORE, WP:DEL#REASON and most importantly the general notability guideline WP:GNG, which the subject clearly passes. WP:SCHOOL which you referenced was discussing individual schools, not general educational topics. The only issue to be discussed was whether the subject should be merged to Special education but I believe the arguments raised at the DRV that they were separate subjects was persuasive. You will note that we have separate articles for Primary school and Primary education for example. Thanks, Black Kite 21:30, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I keep giving you the same answer because it is the correct answer based on policy and consensus. This is my last comment on the matter. Black Kite 00:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD is not PM

Please stop using WP:AFD to discuss merges. The purpose of AfD is to propose the permanent and complete removal of a subject from Wikipedia.

If you want to propose a controversial merge, use the {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates, and list it at Proposed merges. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by MuZemike 04:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

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).

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

Request reason:

There is no confirmation of Jessica's ban. See Wikipedia talk:List of banned users#Adding a missing banned user. I don't see how I am evading the ban when there was never a ban for Jessica to begin with. Jessica is an indefinitely blocked user, not a banned user.

Decline reason:

Who cares. If you want to edit, Jessica, then you should log in to your first account and request an unblock there. You are not allowed to create new accounts to dodge a block. See WP:SOCK for more info. But you know all of this already... Jayron32 06:22, 8 January 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I don't understand. I am not Jessica so how am I supposed to log into Jessica's account?

Decline reason:

Stop wasting our time. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 07:00, 8 January 2010 (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.

Regarding the above, [1] would indicate otherwise. Another admin can decide what they think, I have already weighed in on this. --Jayron32 06:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please help me understand this? There is no confirmation of Jessica's ban. So how can I evade the ban? It doesn't make any sense at all. Rovea (talk) 06:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you aren't Jessica, why should you care? --Jayron32 06:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well obviously people think I am Jessica because I am blocked as Jessica's sock. Rovea (talk) 06:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And since Jessica's first account is currently blocked, she may not edit under any other account until the block on her first account is lifted. See WP:BLOCK and WP:SOCK for more info. And checkusers have confirmed that you are editing from the same IP address as Jessica, and edit the same articles as Jessica, and your edits substantially match those that Jessica is known to make. See link above. --Jayron32 06:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But there is no confirmation of the ban. It doesn't matter. Read Wikipedia:BAN#Decision to ban. Jessica wasn't banned at all. Rovea (talk) 06:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But she is blocked from editing. Users who are blocked from editing may not edit under another account. --Jayron32 07:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica is banned, per WP:BAN's "If a user has been indefinitely blocked and through community discussion it is determined that no administrator is willing to lift or reduce the block, the blocked user is effectively considered to have been community banned." The five points under "Decision to ban" are not the only ways to get banned. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]