Useight

Joined 2 December 2006
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nunh-huh (talk | contribs) at 20:33, 17 May 2007 (Block). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Latest comment: 18 years ago by Nunh-huh in topic Block

Tags For Deletion

  • db-bio is for bio about person, group, etc
  • subst:prod|reason is for other possible deletions
  • db-nocontext is for no context
  • db-spam is for blatant advertising
  • db-inc is for a company with no importance
  • db-nonsense is for pages about nothing
  • db|any text
  • db-attack is for slanderous remarks
  • db-vandalism is for pure vandalism
  • db-test is for a test pages
  • db-nocontent is for blank pages

Other Tags

  • [ [ link|text ] ] to make a link different than its text

Pages I've Made

Questions When Becoming Admin

  • What admin work do you intend to take part in?
  • What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
  • Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

Block

 

You have been temporarily blocked from editing because of your disruptive edits. You are invited to contribute in a constructive manner as soon as the block expires. Nunh-huh 18:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Useight, The vandalism in question was using an attack page for chatting, specifically is matt gay. If you still think there's been an error, please let me know. Nunh-huh 19:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC) I've removed it on the basis that I may have misread your intent. Feel free to delete this once you've read it.- Nunh-huh 19:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • It appears there's been a misunderstanding... per the deleted page log, the only activity User:Useight has had on the article was tagging it with a {{db-attack}} tag; the other two blocked users in the edit history of this page actually did use the page as an attack chat board as such. I'm going ahead and reversing the block on this basis. --Kinu t/c 19:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Your unblock is hardly necessary, since I've already unblocked him. (see the text directly above yours). - Nunh-huh 19:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
I didn't see it in the log so I wasn't aware that you had. --Kinu t/c 19:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
It doesn't hurt to be unblocked twice, I suppose. My apologies, btw, to Useight, for having misunderstood his contribution to that page. - Nunh-huh 19:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
 Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of I was blocked by mistake lifted or expired.

Request handled by: Nunh-huh 20:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Only a complete toad would try to use this against you, and I don't think you need to worry they will. If they do, I would certainly back you up. Glad to see the unautoblock went through. - Nunh-huh 20:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply