User talk:Kenpp

Non-admin comment: First of all, I am not an admin, you were blocked by NawlinWiki, second you have not explained the reason why you were blocked, and third, please read WP:NOTTHEM. Momo san Gespräch 21:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Kenpp, I have unblocked you because the reason for blocking you in the first place was wrong; your edits were not vandalism. However, that doesn't mean your contributions have been good either. You were edit warring on several articles, and not discussing it at talk pages. Since you and Kintetsubuffalo disagree over whether your link should be included, you guys should start a discussion (either here, or at a talk page such as Talk:Police brutality) to reach a consensus. And you need to understand that, if you don't follow this dispute resolution, and if you continue edit warring, you may be blocked again through the edit warring policy.
 * Also, I should point out to you that threatening to go to Jimbo Wales is not appropriate, mature, or helpful. Jimbo Wales is not, despite what you may think, the "ruler" of Wikipedia. He created the site and he is very experienced, but he can't (and doesn't) boss editors around, so going to him isn't going to change anything since he can't order anyone to unblock you. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 22:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * My sincere apologies if any of my very small Wikipedia contributions came across as unfriendly in any way. I am not an expert Wikipedia user and I was very unpleasantly surprised that my first contributions to Wikipedia had been immediately reverted without any good explanations. The reasons claimed for reverting my very small contributions and blocking, Wikipedia "vandalism" and "Using Wikipedia for spam or advertising purposes", were very insulting to me, since I myself greatly dislike such acts.  Kenpp (talk) 23:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You are correct that your edits shouldn't have been labelled "vandalism" or "spam". But some editors did appear to think they were POV (in other words, they did not support a neutral point of view), so you should have a discussion with these editors about whether or not the links are worth adding. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 23:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)