User talk:Amitie 10g


 * Your only edits here have been to edit User space pages that do not belong to you. Your response to me indicated that you did not understand that this was inappropriate, and you then continued to edit another User page that did not belong to you. You may have a long history, but you do not seem to have experience as you claim. Your edits have neither helped Wikisource nor been appropriate. You have no reason to be unblocked. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You forgot to answer why CommonsDelinker is operated by CommonsDelinker instead of Magnus Manske. My editions was in good faith, and although here is not a AGF policy, the spirit of any WMF project is considering the intentions rather than the actions. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Your only edits here have been to edit User space pages that do not belong to you. Your response to me indicated that you did not understand that this was inappropriate, and you then continued to edit another User page that did not belong to you. You may have a long history, but you do not seem to have experience as you claim. Your edits have neither helped Wikisource nor been appropriate. You have no reason to be unblocked. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:03, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Davod: I would disagree with both the edits being right, and in fact both are probably wrong. That said I don't see that either are blocking offences for a week, they are inconveniences, and your blocks are punitive rather than preventative and I don't see how they fit within Blocking policy. — billinghurst  sDrewth  05:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The block is preventative. I merely reverted Davod's first edit. His response was to post to my talk page demanding justification, and to go edit another user's talk page right away. It was clear to me that his only intention was to edit the user space of other users, and the block prevents that. And his response was to my explanation of the block was to demand a reason for reverting his edit and claim to be very familiar with policies, stating that he'd edited the same user pages on other Wikis. His self-stated reason for being here is to edit other user pages, and the block is to prevent that. His desire to be unblocked is so he can make those edits which both you and I agree are wrong. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Degrees of wrongness doesn't equate to blockness. They were not vandalism, just unwise. They are also now changed, and I think the message is clear, so I think that the block should be removed as it isn't preventative, and at this stage is punitive. — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)