This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Groigi (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

My contributions were reverted and deleted and I was given an indefinite block for "block evasion." The blocker didn't say who they thought I was or anything at all, for that matter. I edited for a while as an unregistered before finally registering, but I was never blocked for anything (though that admittedly might be difficult for me to prove if need be, since I've edited from different locations and computers, so there are different IP addresses that others have also had.)

Accept reason:

Unblocked per below. Graham87 15:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Graham87 - Any insight here? SQLQuery me! 00:17, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

I didn't have any specific account in mind, but I figured that anyone who created an account to mess with categories in a highly tangential manner is clearly up to no good. This edit bby you as an IP is even worse; by that logic anybody who identifies as having a gender (or the vast majority of people) who have ever had noteworthy violence perpetrated on them should be in a category about violence against [men/women] by continent. Nope, you're not welcome here. I don't believe you when you say that this wasn't your first account, and nothing you can say could make me change my mind. Graham87 01:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I added what I thought were related pages to violence against men and women categories and categories like racially-motivated violence and others. If edits I made (and I edit other things besides just stuff like that) were controversial or broke rules or something... something could have just been said to me and things could have been hashed out. There were Australia-related pages (only one of them added by me) in the violence against men category, so I thought I'd make an Oceania category to go with the other continent categories there. I was never that interested in making an account, but it turns out only registereds can create categories, so I eventually did get around to making an account and then the category after I found enough of what I thought were pages that fit in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Groigi (talkcontribs) 23:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Maybe I was a bit too harsh about the first account thing. I'll tell you what ... I'll unblock you if you promise to not deal with categories, because your idea of what's "related" to a category is remarkably eccentric. It'd be much better if you used edit summaries to explain your edits. Also, "trying to make serious edits to Wikipedia as an IP editor is like blindly blundering through the countryside on the first day of hunting season dressed like a moose" (see rule #12), and the same is doubly true of newly active accounts making weird edits. Graham87 02:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
That sounds perfectly reasonable. I'll cool it with the category additions and stuff like that, and in hindsight I do see why I probably should have offered rationales for potentially questionable changes I've made. There never seemed to be any kind of kerfuffle over any of them up until now, so it just... didn't seem a very pertinent thing to do, I guess. And I really probably should have started a discussion somewhere first about that category I made and the viability of it and what should be included in it, instead of just jumping the gun and going at it alone in a way that admittedly kind of can be construed as suspicious or off; a new account making a category like that out of the blue and rapidly filling it with what looked like random pages. I really did try to only include pages about incidents which seemed to have some kind of gender factor--sex crimes and homophobic attacks, and serial cases (like The Family Murders) where the victims were all male--and not just any in which the victims happened to be a boy or a man. Groigi (talk) 04:27, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I've unblocked you per the above. Happy editing! Graham87 15:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)