User talk:Govert Miereveld~enwiki

Welcome!

Hello, Govert Miereveld~enwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! —Ruud 21:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Digraven

Hallo Govert, ik denk niet dat het bijzonder nuttig is om een los artikel te schrijven over elke di-, tri-, of tetragraaf die in het Nederlands (of welke taal dan ook) voorkomt. Dit zal waarschijnlijk resulteren in een erg groot aantal één- of tweeregelige artikelen. Het lijkt mij een beter idee om deze samen te voegen in één enkel artikel. Groeten, —Ruud 21:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archaic Dutch declension

Please, whatever your opinion about the contens of that page, do not move the page by copying-and-pasting its contents to a new location. Such moves are strictly forbidden because they mess up the page history. Pages must only ever be moved by means of the "move" button. Moreover, if you want it at a different place and you know there will be objections, you are required to engage in discussion and garner consensus first, rather than unilaterally pushing a move through. Move wars are considerably more disruptive than simple revert wars. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations and vandalism.

When you write an article about Dutch declention do it properly, the version you support is not contempory. It's some kind of mix between the middle Dutch case system an supposably modern spelling. I don't care if you make such an article, but use the correct title and don't make it pose as something it's not. Continue to accuse me of vandalism or keep pushing a wrong page, and I will use every wikipedia guideline and policy to stop you.Rex 14:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beledigingen

Wat denk je nou op te lossen met een kinderachtige scheldpartij? Je heb zojuist al je geloofwaardigheid op wikipedia verloren. Het idee dat wanneer je geen argumenten voor je stelling hebt dat je mensen maar gaat uitschelden is gewoon te belachelijk voor woorden. Ga je schamen knul. Rex 20:35, 4 April 2007 (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).

Govert Miereveld~enwiki (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Meantime the user who blocked me in the first place (Rex) has been blocked himself. I hope Wikipedia now sees that he was trying to end the discussion by blocking me and other users.

Decline reason:

You were not blocked by Rex, nor was your primary account. It also appears you are still evading your block. You'll need to provide a much more detailed explanation, and stop editing articles in the meantime. Kuru (talk) 01:03, 16 March 2011 (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.

I don't understand this request; this account was blocked in 2007 as a sockpuppet of User:Bombshell, but the unblock request is about a different user. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I (= Govert Miereveld (talk) 23:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC) ) could be unblocked, because I was blocked due to Rex) (who has been banned meantime). I added the unblock request without being logged in (because I thought I couldn't edit when I was logged in) Govert Miereveld (talk) 23:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Govert Miereveld. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Govert Miereveld~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

00:15, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

13:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)