User talk:ThomasK

I can´t do that with an indefinite block on my account ..... --ThomasK (talk) 14:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You are still allowed to open up an article's source while blocked, copy and paste it here and edit it. Pick one. Daniel Case (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Reverted you again. You are not allowed to remove declined unblock requests while you are still blocked-- Jac 16888 Talk 13:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:ANI where the issue of your unblocking has been raised. If you can put together a reasonable unblock request (not a demand to be unblocked), there is probably a fair chance of success. If it is true that you have refrained from sockpuppetry while blocked, that should also count in your favour. Remember, what admins granteth, admins may taketh away. Mjroots (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks four you hint of trust. But I´m now banned from the wiki chat and can´t edit the WP:ANI page you suggested. So what should I do now? --ThomasK (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * As you have been told several times, while you are blocked you must leave declined unblock requests on your page. Every time you ignore this you're making it even less likely you'll ever be unblocked-- Jac 16888 Talk 15:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I was about to unblock when I saw all the reversions and the insulting edit summaries, which to me were proof there was no intention to change. All you had to do was keep your cool and cooperate and you'd have been unblocked by now, as the ANI discussion was sympathetic to your request. Dougweller (talk) 19:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

please unblock. my apologizes. What I wrote was premature. Thanks --ThomasKsock (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove declined unblock requests from your talk page. See WP:BLANKING. Dougweller (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You ignored me and removed them again. I've protected your talk page but left your last unblock request. You can't edit this anymore. If this request is declined you will be told how to appeal by email. Dougweller (talk) 09:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * the request isn't on hold in order to contact the original admin (he or she is long gone) but to run it past ANI. However I shan't unblock you or your sock accounts in order to comment there. We shall decide it on merit without your input for now. If you sock in order to get over there I guarantee it will be declined. Give it time. S.G.(GH) ping! 10:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request moved from user page

 * I've taken this to ANI as well. If this gets declined, with all your pages locked down, either use the email or just give up on it, mate. S.G.(GH) ping! 08:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Seeing as he was told to go away for 6 months, then come back as per WP:OFFER a mere 3 weeks ago, this recent series of events probably has 100% invalidated that possibility. Of course, telling is all to "fuck off" on a March edit probably was even worse. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 10:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Creating a WP:SOCK (User:ThomasKone) was a new low on the "dumb things I have done" scale. You're trying to be welcomed back - being welcomed back requires you to learn, understand, and show understanding of the rules. You know about WP:SOCK - yet you broke it anyway. Wikipedia is a privately-run site, you have no rights here, and flaunting the rules because you think you have a right to an active account is just plain dumb. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 16:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * ... and your violation of WP:EVADE found here has reset the clock...and now the earliest time for WP:OFFER will if you are lucky be the end of April 2011. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 07:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of GlobalSecurity.org for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GlobalSecurity.org is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/GlobalSecurity.org until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Toddst1 (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)