User talk:Metalman59

Elockid-Please read this

I was not vandalising anything technically. i wrote an informative paragraph on south asia


 * There is no excuse for edits like this . There is no possible way that edit was intended to be helpful, it is a racial slur. I think you will find that Wikipedia has a very low tolerance for racism. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove declined unblock notices, and maybe you could manage to put your request inside the templae where it belongs, and to make sure it addresses all of the reasons you were blocked, as noted in the last decline. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted the decline here by an non-admin, and will leave the second request open for another admin to review. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I am very sorry. I have listed all my aggressions above. Please take some time to think about the removal of my block. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalman59 (talk • contribs)


 * Personally, any person who resorts to combined homophobic AND racist comments like here especially when angry has no place on a project where we value community and consensus. Clearly there's maturity issues here, and this editor has not read nor understood WP:5P.  That's my personal opinion, however, I will not decline this unblock request. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 11:10, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You're blocked for those racial slurs. It's not a vandalism problem; it's a severe civility problem, and you have given no reassurances except for "say-what-you-wanna-hear" ones that don't have an ounce of substance to them. I will be surprised if any admin undoes the block. — Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 21:20, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

IF you are unblocked - and I'll say up front that, like all the others reviewing your appeals here, I'm not convinced in the slightest that you won't do this again - if you are unblocked, what edits would you intend to make here? Would you agree to avoid editing articles that relate to the Middle East & India? Hers fold  (t/a/c) 01:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

As I have already declined a previous unblock request, I will defer to another administrator on the current one, but I will reiterate what has already been said several times here. You have shown little desire to achieve consensus on multiple occasions and it would certainly be an understatement to say your edits have been tendentious. It's not whether there is "nothing to lose" (your words) but whether the encyclopedia has anything to gain by unblocking this account. Given the history here, I can't honestly say if there is. -- Kinu  t/c 20:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I will agree to a topic ban of Indian and Middle Eastern related articles. After a few months, i would like to have that right back too please.I see why you are hesitant, and I am sorry for all the trouble and time I have wasted. Remember, you can always block me again if i do something (which I won't).However, is there any guides out on editing wikipedia? I need to know how to cite information.


 * This is a much better appeal, thank you. However, given that you've been blocked twice before for this sort of behavior, I am still hesitant to unblock you. Would you be willing to agree to a topic ban covering Middle East and India related articles, as I suggested above? If you demonstrate that you can edit constructively in other areas, you would be welcome to ask that the restriction be lifted at the administrator's noticeboard after a few months. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

@ hersfold

 * Yes, there are plenty of guidelines, policies, and help pages - here is the one about citing sources, although you may also want to read these about making sure your sources are verifiable and reliable. List of policies and guidelines lists all of our major policies and guidelines.
 * I'm going to check in with the administrator who blocked you to see if this topic ban is enough to unblock you. Hang on just a little bit longer, and we'll see what we can do. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 23:36, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, i forget all the time. It was not intentional lol. will keep in mind. Metalman59 02:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Topic Ban
I see you have agreed to a topic ban on middle east and India related articles, broadly defined. I note with concern your edits to White people, which seem to be on the same topic as you have agreed to a ban on. Editing on these topics by the "back door", by avoiding articles exclusively about them, feels a lot like gaming the system. I quote from policy on topic bans: "Unless clearly and unambiguously specified otherwise, a topic ban covers all pages (not only articles) broadly related to the topic, as well as the parts of other pages that are related to the topic. For example, if an editor is banned from the topic "weather", they are not only forbidden to edit the article Weather, but also everything else that has to do with weather"

I am investigating the correct avenue to raise this ban evasion, but I will refrain from doing so if you refrain from such edits in future. It may be a good show of good faith if you were to undo recent edits that are related to the topic you agreed to a ban on. I will be notifying the unblocking admin of this, but not requesting any action on their part - just keeping them updated. SamBC(talk) 13:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, I thought since it was a different article I could edit. I'll refrain from it from now on, however, I had reliable sources, etc. i was not aware that the topic ban extended that much too. Thanks for the warning I'll stop.--Metalman59 21:27, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's an easy enough misunderstanding if your new to the idea of topic bans, and the phrasing that was used when your ban was agreed wasn't the most helpful in terms of making it understood - no worries. Thanks for responding constructively. SamBC(talk) 23:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, when does my topic ban expire?? Thank you, and sorry I just wanted to know. --Metalman59 21:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No length was agreed for it, so I guess, in one sense, it doesn't. It was voluntary, so I suppose you could ignore it, but tendentious editing will probably quickly lead to a new block, and possibly a ban. The proper thing to do would probably be to seek wider community input somewhere, but I'm honestly not sure what the right place should be. Try looking at the project pages on user conduct nd disputes, that may give an idea. SamBC(talk) 14:17, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sam pointed me to this discussion - your topic ban is indefinitely long (that is, it doesn't end). You can appeal the ban at AN as early as January 26th, however edits such as the ones you've made recently will not help at all. Your topic ban covers any topics referencing the Middle East or India. That means if you are editing about anything remotely related to these topic areas, regardless of the article, you are violating your topic ban. You can edit the White people article, but not if your edits relate to the Middle East or India in any way.
 * Now I would have overlooked this as a misunderstanding, however it seems as though you are continuing to edit in this area despite Sam's warnings. As such, I am blocking you for 24 hours for violation of your topic ban. Please note that any future violations will result in longer blocks, and repeated violations will result in reinstatement of your original indefinite block. If you aren't sure about where you can edit, please ask before doing so. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about the editing, it's just that one editor took out an entire section of the article which was cited and everything, on his basis that only europeans were white, without citing or ANYTHING. I will not edit anymore, but it frustrates me because everything was polished and cited, yet one person vandalizes, and everything changes. If either one of you would like to see what they have done, it is on white people. Look at the talk page as well, as many people are just basing things off their POV. I am not editing anything relating to the middle east, even if it is vague. However, I plead that you look at what is happening. An editing war may have started as well. I would like you to revert the page, because everything was cited, etc. However, you are the administrator. Have a nice day, --Metalman59 18:08, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Further contentious editing in violation of topic ban
It looks like you simply waited for attention to die down on the article White People before adding back in material that had been removed according to consensus. Not only is this contentious, as the edits are in contention with consensus established on the talk page, but it is also in violation of your topic ban, as you have previously been counselled. I will be drawing this to the attention of admins. SamBC(talk) 12:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

1st off it barely applies to my topic ban, although I am aware that it does 2nd was it contentious when I got all the reliable sources and made a useful contribution only to have it deleted by 2 people who said white people were only europeans? 3rd I barely edit wikipedia anymore, and since this is a shared computer, I don't even know who it was honestly I told hersfold that I would stop and I did. Just because somebody did it doesn't mean it was me. I'll change the password, calm down dude.

I