User talk:Kuiet

January 2020
Your account has been blocked indefinitely because it is being used only for vandalism. Furthermore, your username is a blatant violation of our username policy, meaning that it is profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you think there are good reasons why these don't describe your account, or why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text at the end of your user talk page. N.J.A.  &#124; talk  11:06, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

No. I want you to address why you picked this current username in the first place. I understand yhour claim that you won't pick an offensive username in the future (though I do note that your suggested username, Kkorektor, contains three 'k's). But you have to address why you picked such an offensive one in the first place. You have one more chance to do so. --Yamla (talk) 00:57, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

"Don't ask questions within your unblock request; that's reserved to explain why you will not be a problem to the project, not to request clarifications about policy. Before requesting to be unblocked, you can ask the administrators that blocked you any clarification about their actions" Allow me to ask for clarification. Having read the policies, I cannot find anything regarding adressing the reason a violation was made in the first place. Can you clarify how you wish to see the reason addressed that I may best assuage your concern? And as for the three 'k's, does that mean you find the suggestion improper? Say so and I shall readily comply and think of something else. Kike korrektor (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You have to address why you picked your current offensive username. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 01:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Again, please elaborate or point me to the relevant policy paragraph. Does 'address why' simply mean 'state your reason(s) why'? Since Yamla is only giving me one chance of addressal, I do not wish to botch it by giving what you would consider an incomplete address why. Kike korrektor (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Straight question. Why did you choose this user name? What significance does it hold for you? What were you trying to say? --  Deep fried  okra    01:56, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Kike korrektor (talk) 02:26, 12 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm OK with this, and have no objection to this user being renamed and unblocked. I understand carrying the hateful banner proudly; but the term is sufficiently objectionable (it's actually the only anti-semitic epithet I've been called, when I was 12 or so, good gosh 50 years ago) that it will engender negative reactions from people who don't know why you're doing it. Wikipedia isn't really the right place for this sort of activism -- it verges on disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 03:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I object to this user being renamed and unblocked. I strongly believe they should choose a username with no nazi overtones. For that matter, a non-offensive username. I don't want to see ethnic slurs. I don't want to see references to the Ku Klux Klan. No dog-whistle politics. No pointy disruption. If this user is not capable or willing to pick an acceptable username, I will move to WP:CBAN them. --Yamla (talk) 12:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Certainly. I attach no value to the username 'Kkorrektor' and I definitely wish to avoid antagonising you, thus in respect of your senior judgment, I ask to be immediately renamed to 'Kuiet' (if you do not find the name objectionable). The matter being resolved, would it be improper of me to ask you to involve the community anyway? Not to scrutinize your judgment, nor to overrule your will, for I recognize the sensibleness of your ruling and intend to uphold it, unconditionally. I merely wish to acquaint myself with the general communal climate by observing how the others - relieved of any unwanted responsibility for my future username - would perceive the name 'Kkorrektor'.(Edit: in case I am not being clear, I mean for their insight to be purely academical, to have no bearing on my actual username, which would ideally already be irreversably resolved to 'Kuiet' before the community even gets involved). I make this plea in good faith, but if it runs counter to established etiquette or any existing policies, please overlook my transgression, it was not meant as such. Kike korrektor (talk) 20:04, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to the username, Kuiet. I withdraw my objection to another administrator lifting your block. If you are unblocked, I have no objection to you raising the concern about your current-as-of-writing username and of some of your suggested replacements. I suggest WP:ANI may be a place for that discussion, but there may be better options. I would certainly be willing to participate in the discussion if you wish, or if you prefer I remain silent and let others discuss it with you, I'm certainly willing to abide by that request. A sincere thank you for picking a different username. --Yamla (talk) 20:41, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 16:00, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

What makes you think Wikipedia talkpages are an appropriate outlet for Nazi propaganda? Blocked.
What makes you think Wikipedia talkpages are an appropriate outlet for Nazi propaganda, Kuiet — or, as you were originally known, Kike Korrektor? I have removed your long propaganda piece from Talk:Nazism and blocked you indefinitely as not being here to create an encyclopedia. See also WP:NONAZIS. 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. Bishonen &#124; tålk 21:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC).


 * So all this crap about "proudly wearing the hateful banner" was a lie. Thanks for making a fool of me. I'll remember. -- Deep fried okra  User talk:Deepfriedokra 11:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not crap, it wasn't a lie and I still firmly believe every single bit I've said then. I'm sorry to hear you feel foolish. I don't think I had anything to do with that but I sincerely apologise if I had; I have absolutely nothing against you and such was never my intention. Can you explain why; do you also think I'm a nazi?Kuiet (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Bishonen if your question is "What makes you think Wikipedia talkpages are an appropriate outlet for Nazi propaganda?" all I can reply is "When did you finally decide to abandon argumentation and reason for loaded questions and rhetorical tools?"
 * Because in case you haven't realised: that's all your question is.


 * Obviously, I don't think they are an appropriate outlet for nazi propaganda.
 * Presuming you actually intend to provide reasons for your block, before appealing I should like you to elaborate on what exactly you think I have done.


 * Here's my view on things:
 * Not a single time have I edited any article to include anything untrue. If I've anticipated that others might disagree with what I wish to include I've made it a point to first thoroughly present my ideas on the talk page, then listen and engage in debate with other editors to make up my mind on what is sensible. When others disagreed, I have never selfishly pursued my own ideas. Cases in point:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:British_Union_of_Fascists#Battle_of_Cable_Street
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Race_(human_categorization)#biological_essentialism
 * So what makes you think I'm not here to help build an encyclopedia?


 * In the talk page, what you refer to as propaganda, I understood to be objective truths. If that is not the case, you could've just corrected me. If they are true, but you disagreed about including them in the article, you could've also just explained why. I've made my views on their importance clear and I've received no rebuttal. Obviously, if I perceived them as propaganda I never would've even brought them up. Obviously, if you revealed them as such, the point would have immediately become closed.


 * And why the did you also include NONAZIS with no elaboration; is that a halfassed attempt of accusing me of being a nazi? That's even worse than a loaded question, how am I supposed to argue against zero arguments? I went on the nazi-ideology-talkpage to provide reasons on why I think nazi ideology includes social policies. That makes me a nazi?? Then what does an encyclopedist look like?? I can overlook your loaded question but what the hell man, I can't take that lightly! You don't accuse someone of being a nazi and not say why! Edit: And please, excuse my french. I got heated. Kuiet (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Don't hold your breath. I suggest you just appeal the block and try your eloquence on an uninvolved admin. After all, in February it worked (rather to my surprise) with several experienced admins who I have a lot of respect for. I'll just ping Deepfriedokra — I guess you forgot — in case he has an appetite for discussion with you. Bishonen &#124; tålk 19:44, 6 April 2020 (UTC).
 * I think I've said all I need to. Maybe someone not pissed off would like to revoke TPA. -- Deep fried okra  User talk:Deepfriedokra 13:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)


 * thank you kindly for your suggestion but I cannot appeal it before understanding your reasoning:
 * What are your reasons for thinking I'm not here to build an encyclopedia? Why should I also see NONAZIS?Kuiet (talk) 01:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What are your reasons for thinking I'm not here to build an encyclopedia? Why should I also see NONAZIS?Kuiet (talk) 01:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I believe your excuses for your original username were lies, and that your long adulatory discussion of Hitler's social polices at Talk:Nazism was added the page for the purpose of putting the Nazi party in a good light. I also believe your questions and comments re the block on this page are offered in bad faith. If you ask me any further questions instead of moving on to a formal unblock request, I'll remove your talkpage access. You would then still be able to request unblock, but not on this public page. Bishonen &#124; tålk 09:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC).

I hope passions have sufficiently cooled by now that we can progress impassively, so here goes. I believe they weren't lies. So how can we resolve this? Do you wish to point out any part specifically that seems ingenuine to you? Can you show me anything adulatory I've written, anything at all? If you click again on the link you've provided above, you will see it as purely composed of quotes from a book which catalogues things the Nazi party did. There is no 'that's why Nazis=good/ that's why Nazis=bad' subjective coloring. So how did you conclude I, personally, adulate Nazis? They really aren't. I just got (and still am) confused why quoting a book about the Nazi Party on the talk page for the Nazi Party is a bannable offense.Kuiet (talk) 17:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

So what am I supposed to do when the main hurdle is you not believing what I said about my personal identity and character? Should I talk about myself some more? I'm genuinely at a loss here. Kuiet (talk) 14:02, 22 October 2020 (UTC)