User talk:The owner of all/Archives/2021/September

Wizard of Oz

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I'm curious. What is the reason you added the song about the witch being dead to your user page? --Tryptofish (talk) 21:25, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Considering you have failed to WP:AGF about me in the past, to me it looks like it's not really curiosity but rather you are looking for me to say something that can eventually become evidence to use against me in future discussions. Thus, I decline to provide any direct answer to your question. 21:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

You have every right to reply or not, but there is an unmistakable coincidence of your edit happening immediately after the retirement of the editor with whom you clashed in the dispute to which you refer. If that's purely a coincidence, it would be easy to offer a simple explanation. Absent such an explanation, and indeed in its express refusal, I and others will draw the conclusions that we will draw. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:56, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I do not refer to any disputes on my user page, as I understand doing so to be a violation of WP:POLEMIC. And I also have the right of privacy such that I am not required to explain events in my private life in order to satisfy your (and/or the unspecified "others") desire for information. 22:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

MfD nomination of User:The owner of all

User:The owner of all, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The owner of all and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:The owner of all during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 20:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

The less dramatic option

Hi - would you please consider removing that part of your user page which is causing all this drama? It'll just end up going to ANI and then we'll have days of talking about it and probably decide its not a great idea, or you can remove it and we can crack on with doing more productive things ~TNT (she/they • talk) 20:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I have explained that it is not related to MPants. I believe that I am not responsible for others' interpretation of it. Thus, in the absence of clear guidance as to when I can add a famous quote from a famous work, and after I have explained that it is not in reference to the editor that retired recently, I will maintain my user page and if someone wants to start a community discussion then I will respect that. 20:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ~TNT (she/they • talk) 21:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Likewise, just below it. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Noting that I started closing the deletion discussion before the ANI discussion was opened; I learned of it when I came here to advise of the closure. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors.

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 ~~~~}}.  ~TNT (she/they • talk) 21:12, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Reasoning for block ~TNT (she/they • talk) 21:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

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).

The owner of all/Archives/2021 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I apologize that some may have considered my userpage content to be an attack. I request to be unblocked and I will do my best to refrain from edits that could be perceived as attacks. TOA The owner of all ☑️ 21:14, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Per below. Also, weasel unblock requests are not useful at Wikipedia. Johnuniq (talk) 23:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

Having read the ANI threads, the MfD, and the deleted user page, I'm frankly not convinced by this unblock request. Absent a clear and convincing explanation of what on earth it was if it wasn't an attack I'm not inclined to unblock. Thryduulf (talk) 23:17, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. If an innocent, reasonable explanation for adding that quote exists, the time to make it was when an explanation was requested above, or instead of just reverting it back onto your user page while crying AGF, or at your user page's deletion discussion; not after being blocked and hoping for a sufficiently-credulous admin. —Cryptic 23:25, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

The user page was deleted and I do not intend to restore the disputed content (although I would request to restore the non-disputed content). Since there were no issues raised other than that specific item on my user page, I believe an indef block is unnecessary, because I had been contributing to articles and WP discussions without anyone saying that there were any issues.

However, since another admin has already declined, I will not request again for now. However, I would like to ask when it would be appropriate to request an unblock again? 23:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

In my experience, you may technically request again at any time, with a substantially reworded request. Practically speaking, I would carefully read the guide to appealing blocks, take some time to think about the circumstances that led to the block, and formulate a request that addresses the reason for your block, and the plan going forth to avoid the behavior that led to your block. SQL^{Query Me!} 03:52, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Userpage restored

As requested, I have restored the prior version of your userpage from before the recent dispute. Also, please note that although I closed the MfD and deleted the page, I was not involved in blocking you. I have no objection to an unblock as long as you agree not to restore the deleted language or perpetuate the dispute. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, The owner of all. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)