User talk:Bloomingdedalus

Improving Immunology Articles
Hi Bloomingdedalus, I am simply an editor who thinks some of the immunology articles on Wikipedia are far from complete and the quality can be easily improved. I'd love to do it all by myself, but it'd be even better to do it in a team, to be more efficient as well as to get a wider viewpoints (from the medical, molecular and cellular viewpoints for example). If you are interested, please go to here and just start editing. The purpose of the page (it's a new page) is simply to get everyone together and collaborate, as to ensure there's editors for different topics. I look forward to working with you soon, any help would be greatly appreciated.  Kinkreet ~&#9829;moshi moshi&#9829;~ 00:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

January 2014
Your recent editing history at English Defence League shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 15:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Incredibly apologist for open antisemitism. How sickening to see the hatred of Islamic terrorism likened to antisemitism.  That quote has absolutely zero relevance to that article other than to state that hatred of Islam, which has waged perpetual war against the Jews and the west and has shown zero signs of progression or improvement, is akin to Nazism.  When was the last time a Jew suicide bombed a subway in Britain?  Demanded that Britain or any western country change their national symbols?  Parasitic terrorist apologists you scum - you should be hunted and thrown in Gitmo. Bloomingdedalus (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * it doesn't say that, it compares the current role of anti-islamic thinking on the British right with anti-seminitism in Britain in the pre war period. You need to calm down and try and read what is said  before you react  Snowded  TALK 16:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Which makes the clear parallel that you're supposed to think of disliking the guys who blow up the London subway with disliking, oh, I don't know, Isaac Bashivas Singer. Yes, that's what I think of when I think of Hassan al-Banna, fucking Isaac Bashivas Singer.  I'm sure you'd find either of them happily distributing Mein Kampf (not for academic and historical purposes) and stating Hitler was the greatest thing since Shariah law.  No, it doesn't say Islamophobia is like antisemitism, it just juxtaposes them so you are... supposed to think of them as similar to one another - which - of course - isn't saying they're the same thing.  I guess the people at the Guardian don't remember when the Muslim Brotherhood was all cheers and joy and Allah Akbar when Hitler was bombing London...  Oh, but Islam has changed, you can tell because of the incredibly progressive policies they've shown by occasionally relenting from executing women for being raped and not quite fully managing to kill Salman Rushdie and, instead, accepting the inferior sacrifice of a hotel full of civilians...   Bloomingdedalus (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, I was a little biased, it's utterly irrational to dislike Islam... And disliking Islam is exactly like disliking Jews...  Clearly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF35a5E0uss


 * Don't worry, only 20% of Muslims in the United States, for example, believe suicide bombing is sometimes justified... http://www.pewglobal.org/2009/12/17/little-support-for-terrorism-among-muslim-americans/


 * Ah yes, "Fewer than one-in-ten American Muslims say that suicide bombing is sometimes (7%) or often (1%) justified." That's 20%? Hating people because of their religion is bigotry. Dougweller (talk) 13:50, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Not according to Pew Research: http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2009/12/1445-2.gif I don't hate people for their religion, I hate people who try to kill and oppress westerners because of their religion.  If Islamists didn't behave like savages and have zero respect for human rights in their countries, I wouldn't have a problem with them.  If Saudi Arabia weren't still beheading people for "witchcraft" and homosexuality and adultery and just about anything else I wouldn't call them savages.  No religious belief gives you the right to tread on human rights, and any decent person would be "bigoted" against those who claim otherwise.  And, you sir, should be deeply ashamed of yourself.  Here is an example of antisemitism, from Syrian TV.  I'd be the first person to condemn someone who said Muslims kidnap and eat Christian children, because it's not true.  But if you tell me they imprison 13 year-olds and gather lynch mobs to kill them because someone said that they defiled to Qur'an - well - that's just accurate. Bloomingdedalus (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

 * Reviewing your recent editing, I have noticed several disturbing patterns.
 * I am placing you on notice of the decided Arbitration Committee case on Palestine-Israeli issues. This case enabled any uninvolved administrator to issue a warning to any participant who they feel may be editing disruptively or engaging in battleground behavior here on Wikipedia, which I am sensing here with you.  Per the notice below, you are now notified that further disruptive editing you may make can result in any uninvolved administrator using standard discretionary sanctions to handle the problem.  Please review the WP:ARBPIA case results and WP:DS sanctions to understand them and this notification.
 * It is my hope that you will cease casting such disruptive aspersions on all of Islam here on Wikipedia. Failure to do so will result in sanctions.  We are not the place for fighting real-world battles.  This is not a soapbox for your to argue from.
 * Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 10:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.


 * Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
 * The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
 * Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
 * Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here.


 * I haven't commented or edited any "Israeli-Palestine conflict" pages. Please cease being foolish.  I put no "disruptive aspersions" on any pages - on the contrary - I removed an irrelevant and dogmatic racist quote that was ostensibly "academic analysis" which compared Jews to terrorists.  Bloomingdedalus (talk) 01:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Once again, it did not do that. As someone who has fought anti-Semitism and all religious bigotry for years here, I can't get my head around your misunderstanding here. Or your ability to group all the citizens of a country or members of a religion as culpable for the acts of a minority or the government. That's the essence of bigotry. Dougweller (talk) 09:51, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Final warning - Islamophobic racism such as this will get you blocked. Find another topic.  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 09:54, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Islamophobia as you call it is not remotely racist. The most Islamophobic man I ever met was an Arabic Syrian gentleman from the Syrian Orthodox Church.  His view of Islam was, "all Muslims are terrorists."  Personally, I'm inclined to agree with him given the draconian, racist, and violent policies of imperialistic Islamic governments.  Please stop your insane bigotry against the Jews you parasite.  Antisemitic traitorous racists such as yourself should not be editing Wikipedia.  Anyone who equates criticism of a religious ideology with racism ought not be permitted to administrate anything. "I don't like the word Islamophobia. We must distinguish between attacking ideas and attacking people." - Salman Rushdie Bloomingdedalus (talk) 07:42, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

ANI discussion
Given your response above, I've started a discussion at WP:ANI. Dougweller (talk) 10:08, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked

 * You appear not to be here to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia.
 * I have indefinitely blocked your ability to edit.
 * Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 10:13, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I'll leave it to another Admin to hopefully turn this down, noting that the forged image linked to above is just more evidence that this block was correct. Dougweller (talk) 10:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Pretty sure it's about time to remove talkpage editing for this guy per WP:NOTHERE. 205.166.218.67 (talk) 13:26, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Talk page access disabled.  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 15:41, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Anatomy quarterly newsletter
Delivered on behalf of WikiProject Anatomy by User:Mdann52, using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Anatomy Newsletter #4
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Anatomy newsletter #5
Message delivered on behalf of WikiProject Anatomy by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)