User talk:Explorium

Talk:Meghan Markle
While almost anything goes on Jimbo's talk page, the same isn't true on article talk pages. Attack editors again and you'll find yourself blocked. --Neil N  talk to me 20:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Boo hoo, I'm shaking in my boots. No need to instigate and patronize me, internet warrior. I don't know what´s what. I do have a real job. I was being consistent in my message, and being truthful to my conviction,  and you're proving every single point I made. Don't instigate further. Explorium (talk) 21:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Pbsouthwood
Hello! Just wanted to let you know I reverted your addition to the closed RfA. While your opinion is welcome normally, the discussion had already closed. 03:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I understand. I guess I was writing my support for the RFA at the moment it was being closed. No problem. Explorium (talk) 03:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You guess...poorly. Since it had actually closed nearly 24 hours earlier :D.  —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap sh*t room 16:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * How nice. You're trolling someone who is blocked? Seriously?... Do you also go around kicking disabled homeless vets when they´re down. Get your facts straight before you troll again, and factor in the time zone differences... What a sorry excuse for a human being. Explorium (talk) 17:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , Ah, OK. —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap sh*t room 19:16, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Neil N  talk to me 14:20, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I was blocked for telling the truth on Jimbo Wales Talk page (now deleted in its totality). That's fine. My conscience is clear. Is yours? Explorium (talk) 16:14, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOTSOAPBOX. "You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your opinions" applies here. --Neil N  talk to me 16:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I am aware that I don't fit the mold of a "Wikipedian that fits the mold". Still, you're using rules and admin blocks as a pretext to silence critics of Wikipedia instead of listening to criticism, validate it, and help make Wikipedia (and the world) a better place... Your granddaughters will one day ask "why didn't granddad fight for me when he could?". Tommy Robinson's fight is not without merit. Look at London today, tomorrow, and in 20 years. You can block me, that's fine, but you can't block your conscience. My conscience is clear. Cheers. Explorium (talk) 16:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. We have partisans enough by far without adding more who subscribe to the Socratic method. —Jeremy v^_^v  Bori! 00:20, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 02:27, 8 June 2018 (UTC)