189.148.186.149

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:55, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

ANI discussion

Hello. There is currently a discussion at [1] regarding an issue with which you have been involved. Thank you. Qworty (talk) 08:01, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Douglas Anthony Cooper was changed by 189.148.186.149 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.89761 on 2012-09-28T09:54:28+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Block was politically motivated 189.148.161.27 (talk) 22:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No it wasn't. I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:25, 29 September 2012 (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.

NOTE: this issue is of crucial importance to the animal welfare community. I know that this fact has been contested, but the argument demonstrating this fact has also been erased. In short: having been both blocked AND censored, I am in no position to make my case. I am happy to do this privately, via email, if that helps. It is important that this be judged by a completely independent and neutral Wikipedia editor: NOT JohnDopp or Qworty. In fact, as Zzuuzz has been involved in my efforts to remove this entry in the past, I'd like him/her involved. (Note that Zzuuzz has never in fact supported my request, but I have been impressed by the editor's neutrality.) Furthermore, when this discussion has concluded -- whether or not the entry is removed -- I would like all of these public conversations to be purged. Many of them constitute slander. (And I note that JohnDopp has succeeded in having all conversations regarding himself purged. Which is entirely appropriate. I am simply requesting the same courtesy.)

This discussion will be entirely civilized and neutral, I assure you. This situation is very serious, however: it is profoundly contrary to the ethos of Wikipedia to a) denounce someone publicly and b) then block him, and censor his efforts to defend himself. Especially when it concerns a profound political issue.

189.148.161.27 (talk) 22:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper

• If you have a legitimate privacy concern the first thing you need to do is contact the volunteer response team as detailed at WP:OTRS. We consider blanking of article les to be vandalism. it is not actually up to you whether or not Wikipedia has an article about you but if you have legitimate concerns they can help you deal with it quietly. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for clarifying. To clarify my position: this has nothing to do with the removal of this entry. I would prefer it removed; I'll be fine if it stays. It has to do with the *process* by which I have been denounced, then censored, then blocked. As well as the motives driving that process. This discussion need have no bearing on the removal of the entry, or its editing for neutrality. (Although it has a great deal to do with the tags currently attached to it.) I understand what you say about blanking an entry -- I was unaware of that, and will not attempt it again. But this is, as I say, another issue.

189.148.161.27 (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/189.148.186.149 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Stalwart111 (talk) 05:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

---