| Revision as of 17:33, 29 July 2011 editChase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,859 edits →i need help with headers lol: reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:51, 30 July 2011 edit undoHersfold (talk | contribs)33,142 edits →Blocked Indefinitely: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 216: | Line 216: | ||
| :Hence my self-revert. ] about it. ] (]) 17:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC) | :Hence my self-revert. ] about it. ] (]) 17:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| ::My apologies. I would ask, however, that you follow the guidelines at ], and not reword the header of this to something offensive or derogatory. It's under the 'Section heading' section heading. ] (]) 17:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC) | ::My apologies. I would ask, however, that you follow the guidelines at ], and not reword the header of this to something offensive or derogatory. It's under the 'Section heading' section heading. ] (]) 17:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| == Blocked Indefinitely == | |||
| I have ] your account for a number of reasons, listed below. | |||
| #'''Conflict of interest/POV pushing issues''': It is well known now that you are the Director of Public Relations for GNAA. While conflicts of interest alone are not a reason to block a user, problems stemming from that conflict may be block worthy. It is clearly demonstrable that your primary purpose on Misplaced Pages is to promote the GNAA. In the past several weeks alone, I can see that you have moved the disambiguation page ] to a new title and made the original a redirect, as well as attempted - in bad faith - to nominate a number of articles about other organizations abbreviated as GNAA for deletion. Disruptive conduct such as this is not tolerated, and by itself could be blockworthy. | |||
| #'''Exhausted the community's patience''': When the comments from obviously biased GNAA-affiliated users such as yourself are discounted, there is a clear consensus at ANI to issue a topic ban against you in relation to GNAA articles. The users commenting there cite primarily the above issues, however the support is quite evident. | |||
| #'''Cross-wiki sockpuppetry''': Checkusers on the Simple English Misplaced Pages, working in collaboration with Checkusers on this wiki, have determined that you are also the person who operates the Simple English Misplaced Pages account ]. While there is no explicit policy regarding sockpuppetry of this nature, we have determined that these actions are block-worthy for the conflict of interest concerns noted above, as well as the following reasons: | |||
| ##With the global login system, there is a general expectation that a single user operates one primary account across all languages and projects within the Wikimedia Foundation's purview. This can be demonstrated through the efforts of bureaucrats and stewards to avoid conducting account renames when there may be a conflict with a global account; the account creation project's refusal to create accounts when an active global account by the same or similar name exists; and by the standing policies of bureaucrats and stewards to rename local accounts to allow them to be merged into a single unified account. Thus, while you are not operating multiple accounts on any single wiki, you are operating multiple accounts across all wikis. | |||
| ##With the multiple concerns here on the English Misplaced Pages about your conflict of interest, you are deceiving the Simple English Misplaced Pages's community by veiling that conflict of interest from them. While clearly this is more an issue for Simple to deal with, it is still worth noting here. | |||
| ##You are using your accounts to further bolster support for the GNAA articles on these wikis. A user draft at Simple is currently up for deletion at ]. You, as Lugurr, !voted "Strong keep as it is currently an article on the English Misplaced Pages" - an article which, as I've noted, you work tirelessly on and have campaigned against deletion for on numerous occasions. In this way, you are further deceiving the Simple Misplaced Pages community; unlike the previous note, however, this deception does involve the English Misplaced Pages, and so it can be used as a rationale for a block here. | |||
| As always, you are welcome to appeal this block at any time by using the {{tlx|unblock|your reason here}} template, which you should post below this message. You may also appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee by emailing them directly at {{NoSpamEmail|arbcom-l|lists.wikimedia.org}}. Please note, however, that the BASC is considered the court of last resort for unblock/ban requests, and their decision, if any, will be regarded as final. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 00:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:51, 30 July 2011
Template:Archive box collapsible
It seems to me
that the sources provided supported the phrase that you removed as "speculation" at Ludlow Massacre. However before reverting your edit I figured that I d talk to you. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Go for it, I'm apathetic. LiteralKa (talk) 00:54, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 July 2011
- In the news: Fine art; surreptitious sanitation; the politics of kyriarchic marginalization; brief news
- WikiProject report: Earn $$$ free pharm4cy WORK FROM HOME replica watches ViAgRa!!!
- Featured content: Historic last launch of the Space Shuttle Endeavour; Teddy Roosevelt's threat to behead official; 18th-century London sex manual
- Arbitration report: Motion passed to amend 2008 case: topic ban and reminder
- Technology report: Code Review backlog almost zero; What is: Subversion?; brief news
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
WP:TROLLWARN
This is not promotional. The video was created mostly for this. This is an essay about not feeding trolls. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- Adding it to Troll (Internet), and the essay consisting entirely of that video make me think otherwise. LiteralKa (talk) 02:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I just started it! --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- And I added it to the other page to avoid confusion as is done with many other pages. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- Nobody is going to confuse a brand new essay with a major article. LiteralKa (talk) 02:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- Whether I was correct to be concerned about that is not the item in question. I was not advertising. Besides, the video was created as advice in the first place. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I support the idea behind your essay, it's just the implementation I'm worried about. LiteralKa (talk) 03:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I can understand the potential for it to have been questioned as it was, but I wish you would have talked to me about it first. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 03:18, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I support the idea behind your essay, it's just the implementation I'm worried about. LiteralKa (talk) 03:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- Whether I was correct to be concerned about that is not the item in question. I was not advertising. Besides, the video was created as advice in the first place. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- Nobody is going to confuse a brand new essay with a major article. LiteralKa (talk) 02:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- And I added it to the other page to avoid confusion as is done with many other pages. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- I just started it! --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Warning conventions
As far as I know, they are not official policy, but are generally accepted ways of adding warnings. The same formatting can be found in examples at Blizzard warning, Storm warning, Ice storm warning, Gale warning, Winter storm warning and so on. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 03:44, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:Nihilism Rune.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nihilism Rune.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Misplaced Pages, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Denying Speedy on Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Alert Message Encoding
Just curious, if you removed the humorous tag on the Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Alert Message Encoding, then the page is claiming to be "a standard used to reference warnings on Misplaced Pages." Wouldn't that be considered a hoax of policy? I'm not trying to be challenge you, just better understand why you disagreed with the CSD tag. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:15, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
- I honestly don't think that it applies, as it is not a "blatant attempt at misinformation." I certainly don't fault you for tagging it as such, though, as it's a fuzzy area. LiteralKa (talk) 02:17, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For, at least temporarily, saving my page's rear-end, Thx. --Bowser the Storm Tracker 02:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC) |
- lol, thanks. LiteralKa (talk) 02:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
July 2011
Hello LiteralKa. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Gay Nigger Association of America, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Misplaced Pages article or website of your organization in other articles (see Misplaced Pages:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Misplaced Pages's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- You literally named a section name "Criticism and", and since when is "attacks internet users" NPOV? I am prepared to defend every one of my edits. If you believe that there is a conflict of interest, you are going to have to cite specific edits, instead of templating the regulars. LiteralKa (talk) 18:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- There was a large template at the top of the page stating 'Under Construction', which is why my edits were half-completed - although i didn't notice the section heading! As for templating the regulars, I believe in templating regulars occasionally (see WP:TTR). I also have no doubt that you're prepared to defend every one of your edits, but I'm not after a defence. I'd just like you to keep your edits to the article down to a minimum, ideally only editing to remove blatant misinformation or vandalism. I know you don't like me templating you, but I have to throw out the pages WP:BFAQ, WP:COI and WP:SCOIC - they not only set out rules, but also offer helpful advice as to how yourself, as a 'Director of Public Relations', can edit articles about their own organisations without incurring the ire of the community. All the best, The Cavalry (Message me) 19:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
The Anti-Flame Barnstar
|
The Anti-Flame Barnstar | |
| For using Misplaced Pages policy rather than emotion to handle disputes. nprice (talk) 18:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC) |
ANI Notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The Cavalry (Message me) 22:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 July 2011
- Wikimedian in Residence interview: Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science: an interview with Daniel Mietchen
- Recent research: Talk page interactions; Misplaced Pages at the Open Knowledge Conference; Summer of Research
- WikiProject report: Musing with WikiProject Philosophy
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case opened; hyphens and dashes update; motion
- Technology report: Protocol-relative URLs; GSoC updates; bad news for SMW fans; brief news
A reminder
From your own userbox:
Everyone has points of view with inherent cultural biases - recognition is the first step to achieving NPOV. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- How does that help your case and not mine? LiteralKa (talk) 12:27, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- I don't have a "case" here as I have no involvement with any of the groups sharing a set of initials. I am just asking you to consider the possibility that this deletion debate may have negative consequences for an innocent group that, by coincidence, has a set of initials in common with your group. If you feel my remarks have no validity, feel free to disregard them. Cullen Let's discuss it 18:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Question
Would you be willing to stop editing the GNAA and related articles? The Cavalry (Message me) 12:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- I would be willing to stop editing the GNAA if I would still be allowed to add sources. All other edits would be through edit requests. LiteralKa (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Would you be happy if we topic banned you, or do you feel the GNAA is your primary subject on Misplaced Pages? The Cavalry (Message me) 16:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Isn't that a leading question? Of course I wouldn't be happy if I was topic banned. GNAA is not my primary subject on Misplaced Pages, either. I'd be more than willing to voluntarily avoid editing the page, aside from adding new citations. LiteralKa (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- What do you mean by 'adding new citations'? Would that involve adding content, or simply citing unsourced statements? The Cavalry (Message me) 17:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- The latter. I would do the former through edit requests. LiteralKa (talk) 17:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- That sounds reasonable, but I'm not quite happy yet. I'm concerned about your primary motivation because you only seem to edit the GNAA article - 147 times compared to the 29 of the next-most-edited article. That said, the edits you made there are rather good, so if you stick to non-GNAA topics you could be very How can we be sure that you won't simply get GNAA people to approve the edit requests? Perhaps if edit requests were only approved or declined by uninvolved editors, who aren't pro- or anti-GNAA? I thought we might get a WikiProject or maybe the ARS team (if they're keen?) to blitz the article and see if it can get to GA. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- The vast majority of my edits to the GNAA article were when it was still a draft. I was attempting to get it to be "article-caliber." After that, my edits significantly dropped to that article. As for the approval, how about just any editor who has been registered for more than, say, two years and is not a know GNAA member? (FYI, I really don't care enough to get around the approval thing. Any edits approved by GNAA would cause more problems.) LiteralKa (talk) 17:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Two years is a bit much. Autoconfirmed might be better, and if there are any problems we can always SPI them. The Cavalry (Message me) 18:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Fine by me. LiteralKa (talk) 18:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Two years is a bit much. Autoconfirmed might be better, and if there are any problems we can always SPI them. The Cavalry (Message me) 18:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- The vast majority of my edits to the GNAA article were when it was still a draft. I was attempting to get it to be "article-caliber." After that, my edits significantly dropped to that article. As for the approval, how about just any editor who has been registered for more than, say, two years and is not a know GNAA member? (FYI, I really don't care enough to get around the approval thing. Any edits approved by GNAA would cause more problems.) LiteralKa (talk) 17:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- That sounds reasonable, but I'm not quite happy yet. I'm concerned about your primary motivation because you only seem to edit the GNAA article - 147 times compared to the 29 of the next-most-edited article. That said, the edits you made there are rather good, so if you stick to non-GNAA topics you could be very How can we be sure that you won't simply get GNAA people to approve the edit requests? Perhaps if edit requests were only approved or declined by uninvolved editors, who aren't pro- or anti-GNAA? I thought we might get a WikiProject or maybe the ARS team (if they're keen?) to blitz the article and see if it can get to GA. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- The latter. I would do the former through edit requests. LiteralKa (talk) 17:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- What do you mean by 'adding new citations'? Would that involve adding content, or simply citing unsourced statements? The Cavalry (Message me) 17:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Isn't that a leading question? Of course I wouldn't be happy if I was topic banned. GNAA is not my primary subject on Misplaced Pages, either. I'd be more than willing to voluntarily avoid editing the page, aside from adding new citations. LiteralKa (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
- Would you be happy if we topic banned you, or do you feel the GNAA is your primary subject on Misplaced Pages? The Cavalry (Message me) 16:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of DrunkDuck
I have removed the prod tag you placed on DrunkDuck as it was discussed at AfD and kept back in 2005 and per policy is permanently ineligible for prod. I did this solely to comply with policy (the fact that it was kept after a deletion discussion indicates that deletion is not uncontroversial, the primary qualification for prod); it is not my endorsement for keeping this article. If you wish to pursue deletion, feel free to open another AfD. —KuyaBriBri 17:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Augmentative and alternative communication
Responding to RFCsRemember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Augmentative and alternative communication. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 05:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
CaptainScreebo's warning
Please don't come and bullshit on my tp, you know full well that my comment, like yours, was humorous, even the edit summaries are acronyms of YOUR association and the issue at question here (COI), just adding my 2 cents to the debate. I know where you're at, you can vilify Jimbo Wales and MuzeMike on your site then start crying crocodile tears on WP because someone says "stop being such a gay nigger", really do you think that I am not older than the Universe itself? CaptainScreebo 23:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Calling me an ignoramus is a personal attack. Please desist. LiteralKa (talk) 23:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Additionally, please do not remove my responses. LiteralKa (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Quite honestly, nobody is calling anybody an ignoramus, it's an acronym for COI so if you feel that it's directed at you, what can I say? Oh and this, appears to be totally hypocritical, there was an edit conflict, I didn't notice your comment, and on your tp you're doing exactly what you have the temerity to come and warn me against doing. A comment (I wrote by myself, thanks). CaptainScreebo 00:21, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- I'm allowed to remove warnings on my own talk page. LiteralKa (talk) 00:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Quite honestly, nobody is calling anybody an ignoramus, it's an acronym for COI so if you feel that it's directed at you, what can I say? Oh and this, appears to be totally hypocritical, there was an edit conflict, I didn't notice your comment, and on your tp you're doing exactly what you have the temerity to come and warn me against doing. A comment (I wrote by myself, thanks). CaptainScreebo 00:21, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Additionally, please do not remove my responses. LiteralKa (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
CaptainScreebo, relax. We've got everything in hand. As it stands, I'm certain no-one will take any action over the comment you made - just don't make them in future. LiteralKa - I thought you didn't template the regulars? The Cavalry (Message me) 00:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- I do when it involves personal attacks and vandalism. LiteralKa (talk) 00:30, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- And stop dramatizing, there are no personal attacks or vandalism going on, you're just being pointy as you well know, buddy. CaptainScreebo 00:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- I do when it involves personal attacks and vandalism. LiteralKa (talk) 00:30, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
I changed the heading. Is everyone satisfied now? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 00:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- My my, how reasonable, is it stable? CaptainScreebo 00:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
3RR Warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Misplaced Pages:Deny recognition. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hence my self-revert. Don't be a dick about it. LiteralKa (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- My apologies. I would ask, however, that you follow the guidelines at WP:TPO, and not reword the header of this to something offensive or derogatory. It's under the 'Section heading' section heading. The Cavalry (Message me) 17:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Blocked Indefinitely
I have indefinitely blocked your account for a number of reasons, listed below.
- Conflict of interest/POV pushing issues: It is well known now that you are the Director of Public Relations for GNAA. While conflicts of interest alone are not a reason to block a user, problems stemming from that conflict may be block worthy. It is clearly demonstrable that your primary purpose on Misplaced Pages is to promote the GNAA. In the past several weeks alone, I can see that you have moved the disambiguation page GNAA to a new title and made the original a redirect, as well as attempted - in bad faith - to nominate a number of articles about other organizations abbreviated as GNAA for deletion. Disruptive conduct such as this is not tolerated, and by itself could be blockworthy.
- Exhausted the community's patience: When the comments from obviously biased GNAA-affiliated users such as yourself are discounted, there is a clear consensus at ANI to issue a topic ban against you in relation to GNAA articles. The users commenting there cite primarily the above issues, however the support is quite evident.
- Cross-wiki sockpuppetry: Checkusers on the Simple English Misplaced Pages, working in collaboration with Checkusers on this wiki, have determined that you are also the person who operates the Simple English Misplaced Pages account simple:User:Lugurr. While there is no explicit policy regarding sockpuppetry of this nature, we have determined that these actions are block-worthy for the conflict of interest concerns noted above, as well as the following reasons:
- With the global login system, there is a general expectation that a single user operates one primary account across all languages and projects within the Wikimedia Foundation's purview. This can be demonstrated through the efforts of bureaucrats and stewards to avoid conducting account renames when there may be a conflict with a global account; the account creation project's refusal to create accounts when an active global account by the same or similar name exists; and by the standing policies of bureaucrats and stewards to rename local accounts to allow them to be merged into a single unified account. Thus, while you are not operating multiple accounts on any single wiki, you are operating multiple accounts across all wikis.
- With the multiple concerns here on the English Misplaced Pages about your conflict of interest, you are deceiving the Simple English Misplaced Pages's community by veiling that conflict of interest from them. While clearly this is more an issue for Simple to deal with, it is still worth noting here.
- You are using your accounts to further bolster support for the GNAA articles on these wikis. A user draft at Simple is currently up for deletion at simple:Misplaced Pages:Requests for deletion/Requests/2011/User:Lugurr/Gay Nigger Association of America. You, as Lugurr, !voted "Strong keep as it is currently an article on the English Misplaced Pages" - an article which, as I've noted, you work tirelessly on and have campaigned against deletion for on numerous occasions. In this way, you are further deceiving the Simple Misplaced Pages community; unlike the previous note, however, this deception does involve the English Misplaced Pages, and so it can be used as a rationale for a block here.
As always, you are welcome to appeal this block at any time by using the {{unblock|your reason here}} template, which you should post below this message. You may also appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee by emailing them directly at arbcom-l
lists.wikimedia.org. Please note, however, that the BASC is considered the court of last resort for unblock/ban requests, and their decision, if any, will be regarded as final. Hersfold 00:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)