User talk:Exiles800

I can confirm some of these statements if you need help as I can provide information that was told to me first hand to me by my friend,but please be careful as this is a very sensitive issue.Mark Pagliaro 19:40, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Mark, I don't know how to respond on this page and need to contact you. Exiles800 (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC) I have removed my contact info as this matter was resolved.Thank You.Mark Pagliaro 01:09, 11 December 2012 (UTC)mdp0007

Death of Jimi Hendrix
Please take your concerns about the disputed specifics to Death of Jimi Hendrix. I'm sure there we can work out a decent compromise with all interested parties that also gives due-weight to the several equally unprovable and highly disputed theories about what happened that night. GabeMc (talk 06:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry but I must protest your labeling the evidence behind Jimi's murder as being "equally unprovable" and "highly disputed". It indicates a bias by the editor towards the material. The problem here is that the method of using reliable sources defaults to Monika Dannemann's official story as told to the British investigation. Indeed that main Jimi Hendrix Death entry reflects Monika's official story as related through numerous authors. However this doesn't refute the fact that other credible authors who were not cited in the Hendrix Death entry have a more credible version of Jimi's death than Monika. This is gotten around by referencing numerous authors who have repeated Monika's story in their works, which is a sort of laundering of Monika's false version. However the information I spoke of in those other publications is much more accurate and credibly refutes Monika's version. Therefore to say those other sources are "equally unprovable" is not accurate and comprises a somewhat questionable position by the editor simply because those other sources have proven to be more 'reliable' and backed by numerous witnesses besides the sole word of Monika. Where we credibly are here is those other publications have reasonably shown Monika's version to be false. This is further reinforced by those sources not coming forward to clarify their evidence, as well as the British government's disinterest in following-through on it. This is seriously incriminating behavior by both parties that suggests something being hidden. Monika herself ended-up dead. Yet, with all this happening we view a Hendrix Death entry that is still based on Monika's version that is now provably the less reliable source and is therefore given undue weight by technical form. In short those other "theories" have passed the test of being 'evidence' and should stand before Monika's thoroughly-discredited version. Those other sources have numerous witnesses. The current Death entry relies mostly on completely-discredited Monika Dannemann for its main timeline framework. - By the way, thanks for the new Death article. It should help establish the truth behind Jimi's death. I know this isn't easy. Exiles800 (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Per: "I must protest your labeling the evidence behind Jimi's murder as being "equally unprovable" and "highly disputed". Please read WP:VERIFY, which states: "In Wikipedia, verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that information comes from a reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it." I'll do my best over time to edit the "Death" article to reflect all sides if possible, but please remember, its a work in progress. GabeMc  (talk 23:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

December 2012
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at Talk:Jimi Hendrix. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. AGK [•] 11:12, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Administrators: If Exiles800 appeals my block, please be aware that the defamatory edits have been suppressed (as a result of ticket 2012122010006081). AGK  [•] 11:14, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Protip: if you've been blocked for defamation, don't post the defamatory material in your unblock request. I've revoked talk page access. If you would like to appeal this block, you may use the Unblock Ticket Request System here. Danger High voltage! 19:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement action appeal by 
''Procedural notes: The rules governing arbitration enforcement appeals are found here. According to the procedures, a "clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors" is required to overturn an arbitration enforcement action. To help determine any such consensus, involved editors may make brief statements in separate sections but should not edit the section for discussion among uninvolved editors. Editors are normally considered involved if they are in a current dispute with the sanctioning or sanctioned editor, or have taken part in disputes (if any) related to the contested enforcement action. Administrators having taken administrative actions are not normally considered involved for this reason alone (see WP:UNINVOLVED).''


 * Appealing user : – Exiles800 (talk) 18:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Sanction being appealed : 


Result of the appeal by 

 * This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.