User talk:DarrenPHS

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).

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

Request reason:

Magnolia677 removes my edit, threatens to block me from editing and when I respond, asks if I give a shit (DILLIGAS). I swore at him but I don't see how that's "harassment". It clearly states here "Harassment is a pattern of ***repeated*** offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer". Where's the repetition in that?? lol

Decline reason:

The reason in the block log is "personal attacks or harassment"(my emphasis); additionally, the block notice that you removed indicates the reason for the block is personal attacks. You made a vulgar personal attack that is not appropriate for civil discourse in a public forum, regardless of what others do(as only you can control your behavior). I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2019 (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.

May 2019[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Sandstein 19:39, 4 May 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

How am I "clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia". I've contributed to various articles about south florida (check my edits). I've no idea what you're talking about?? How is it even clear? wot DarrenPHS (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is explained above. Here you appear to be claiming you lack sufficient competence to edit Wikipedia. That's grounds for leaving the block in place, not for lifting it. Yamla (talk) 20:45, 4 May 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

@Yamla: The most recent I did on Wifisfuneral has citations. Also check edits on Ronny J and XXXTentacion. They ALL have citations. How is that not competent? It says literally at Wikipedia: Competence is required "when an editor has shown, through a pattern of behavior, the likelihood that they are not capable of contributing in a constructive manner.". I'm not capable even though I've shown many times to be competent? More info about that? DarrenPHS (talk) 23:01, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

What people are trying to tell you is that you lack the maturity to edit Wikipedia. Please ask your parents why calling someone a "fucking faggot" is inappropriate. You clearly think your current behavior is acceptable and constructive, so I am revoking your talk page access to prevent further time-wasting. You can appeal via WP:UTRS once you understand what the problem is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:54, 5 May 2019 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.