User talk:Godisinthedetails

January 2017
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account was apparently only created for the purpose of attacking a living person using a deceptive edit summary. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice:. Bishonen &#124; talk 08:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Note from the blocking admin: I don't normally indef accounts after one edit, but I thought yours was egregious. Attacks against living people are taken very seriously here, see the policy BLP. It didn't just say "criticised due to lack of verifiable data", as you know. And describing it as "fixed typo"… what was that about? But, the main reason I'm posting is to tell you you don't have to worry about your request being received by an uninvolved admin; it will be, and you'll get a response. If you scroll down, you'll see that it's listed in the Category:Requests for unblock, which means they'll find it. Bishonen &#124; talk 12:05, 10 October 2015 (UTC).

PS... I do think Indef Block is unnecessary. One edit, new account, and I'm not a spammer. I guess I expected deletion of my First Edit, whatever it was. But blocking let alone indefinitely, is usually reserved for multiple edits. . . Even on the WP:AN it says "This page is not for simple vandalism or material which can easily be removed without argument. If you can, simply remove the offending material." -WP:BLPN. What can I say, I tried the edit feature, and it seems i failed miserably. Along with lack of reproducibility, there were some ethics concerns. So the edit was not so "egregious"The fixed typo was the first option i was given really, nothing more than that. I suppose i should have Requested for Block, seems you're more lenient on those who don't care for editing at all but just the yucks. . . Uninvolved admin or not, Id still like to be able to edit, at least a second chance. I havent even gotten to the Three strikes and you`re out rule. lol. Ive seen someone that edited Stephen Colberts Page and he put them on live TV! I suppose my trial (and subsequent error) was not so fortunate. Nevertheless, I am awaiting reinstatement. Namaste.

PPS. . .nevermind the part about the rabbit. . .another trial error
 * To the reviewing admin: I'll leave it to you, no need to consult me if you want to unblock. Don't ask me what the user means by 'requesting for block' or 'just the yucks', or the noticeboard references either — all I get from it is that they seem to be comparing themselves (to their advantage) to some users we're more lenient to (?). Feel free to be as lenient as you like. Bishonen &#124; talk 13:24, 10 October 2015 (UTC).

Impending Perilous Exploits of the Common Man
Hello there,

I am reading this as i write it and i can tell i am overarcing my possibilities for mear invention. there is a need for locality as well as temporaneaity to properly accomodate the amount of procurrences of occurences in our sphere as calculable.

I have lost count of how much money ive spent on pitances of cigarettes and dirty novels trying to wage war against the time until my impending impedence.

However the committees of the nations of the states are overamping their productions with alarming speed. New horizons bent over event horizons. The capital is needed and the men and women are strong, The viability of the future generations are veneretion max potential.

There is a new seed of potentia emulating from my core and ars vartia can only describe my power and thrust for greeds. Making a new conglomeratio of coaguled ambualants i can aggress to higher factors. since last updating my new modus operandi is now: Codexes of Indices of the many powers.

The World is now fully a living organism as it always was but now breathes in harmony.

I love all of you hurt by the cold. Remember me in song and in verse but now as i am but as your memory would have it. I am me, but that is not enough. long do i lust for quelling my thirst for infamy.

It loves to be entangled the brambles that ensnare. erroneous to care. my hair pulled bac thick int ime ill dare but for now my time is harnassed with care. Not enough to intemporate the slogan nor the motto nor the brogan architypes that swaye me. Never can i ever be just a man. but one greater than. Not ever i can;t put it down. In some sense i will, but for now i have a dearth of dirge. Je m'en Fuis.

Godisinthedetails (talk) 09:07, 29 July 2016 (UTC)Si vales valeos.

January 2017
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for creating an article that is at the least an act of vandalism and possibly an attack page per CSD G10. Given your previous history I am reblocking you indefinitely., as you did at Maxwell Philip Bruser. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: unblock. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


 * If you want to retrieve the content you added (as you say you do not have it elsewhere), it might be possible to temporarily restore it in your user space so you can save it elsewhere, or to to send it to you by email. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello. it seems i have not been reinstated and that is still upsetting. I would agree that you should send me a copy of the transcript. Thank you. MPB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Godisinthedetails (talk • contribs)
 * Hi. I have moved your latest message down here. Please always add new messages at the bottom (and indent using : or :: etc as appropriate), as they're easy to miss if you post them in the middle of the page. If you want me to send you the content of the deleted Maxwell Philip Bruser article, you'll need to register an email address - you can do that using the Preferences link right at the very top of the page. Please reply here when you have done that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello i have updated my email address. thank you if you can send me the article subject matter. Much appreciated. I'll take care of it. Still wish i could one day make an impressive article. bad luck with this one. any chance i might be able to edit my own page in the distant future? PS. my favorite feature of the user page account is the hover zoom definitions. well worth an account. Best regards MPB Godisinthedetails (talk) 11:26, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have moved this down here again (once again your replying way up above in the middle of the page doesn't aid communications). I have sent you an email containing the contents of the article. And no, you will not be allowed to create the article here again, as Wikipedia is not a suitable place for publishing autobiographies (or personal philosophies, for that matter). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:36, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

No I suppose it is wrong of me to write my own biography, conflict of interest and all that. Am I correct in that i cant change my own user page currently. I have received the email. Thank you very much. Best regards Godisinthedetails (talk) 11:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * As you are currently blocked, this talk page is the only page you can edit. If you want to be unblocked, I'd suggest making a new unblock request below, agreeing not to write about yourself and describing what encyclopedia content you would work on instead. I'd also suggest you first familiarize yourself with the purpose of Wikipedia user pages, described at User pages. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:20, 11 January 2017 (UTC)