You can contact us at the email address firstname.lastname@example.org outside of the website.Are you the President of Hasanistan Hasan Çakar?Cırbülay 7 June 2017 16:19
Unused image File:Flag of Zhuyskov.png
Unused image File:Hasanistan Coats of Arms.png
Unused image File:Kaabistan Emblem.png
good luck getting approved =)
Confederation of Mahuset edits
The page in question hasn't seen any significant edits since May of last year, I hardly think that qualifies as a work in progress. I don't know Mahuset from a hole in the wall, but their article has a significant number of red links that haven't been cleaned up in the better part of a year. A Red links alert has no bearing on the contents, and follows best practices for how to approach the situation.--DukeBearPeninsula (talk) 19:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Requesting review of ban
- Hello, can I have response please. User:Austenasia User:EmperorAdamI User:Z. Luna Skye User:MissEDconexion -- OIMGov (talk) 13:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Why should you be un-banned?
- First of all, you do not have to be so hostile. I do not know why you feel free to give such an attitude towards people, although I highly doubt you would do so in real life. My only interest in getting unbanned is so I can update articles about my micronation, normally to do this I have to do the edit on notepad or another wiki and request one of my micronational friends do so for me (I do not like pestering people), but I am willing to propose to set my ban to a reasonable time limit in which I am allowed to update my articles and then you are free to ban me again. Also, I was unbanned for the original case you probably "reviewed" so to use that as an excuse is false. The second ban was unfair action by Mr. Belcher who got upset over specific edits that weren't even vandalism, which is the case you should be reviewing. -- OIMGov (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see where in the response User:MissEDconexion was being hostile. They simply stated they weren't convinced, and said you should convince them. If you look at the policies on lifting a ban it says "An administrator or other user can then initiate a discussion of the case and registered users who satisfy the requirements are free to contribute to the discussion." (stressed that section to show that me weighing in here is completely allowed) The admin's actions are precisely in line with the guidance given to us. Furthermore, if you look further down on the page I cited, it states When appealing a block, the blocked user should include some reasons justifying the appeal. As a neutral observer, an Admin was asking for a justification it clearly states should have been included in your initial appeal. Maybe the justification was mentioned elsewhere, but it certainly wasn't done in accordance with this guidance.--DukeBearPeninsula (talk) 19:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Really not helping your case man. If you wish to come back to the wiki, instead of criticizing the integrity of the admin team, why not give reasons why un-banning you would be in the best interests of the community. All in all, please explain how you have improved since the ban was issued and what you will do going forward to not get banned again.
p.s. as for why you were banned permanently, it's because it was your second ban for a similar offence. I commuted your first one and you pulled the same [REDACTED] again, hope this helps.--Guess I never Miss (talk) 02:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please do not use vulgarities on my talk page, it does not reflect on your own seriousness much. I am free to criticise as I please, I do not have to agree with you or like you or bow down to you just to get my ban reviewed. And do not make me discuss the integrity of the admins, there is much to discuss such as how they enjoy vandalising other websites and consider it funny. Now first of all lets discuss the reason of my second ban: I wrote this on the article "20 alt-accounts were banned for vandalism on 26 January 2020. Most of them replaced articles of several micronations with offensive and pro-EU and satirical pro-GUM messages. The GUM claimed that users OIMGov and Mahuset were the perpetrators, while other evidence suggests that Thomas Bainbridge was in fact behind the vandalism.". This is not vandalism or trolling, I wrote the sentence to be more neutral, whether you agree or disagree with the edit is irrelevant as it does not seem to vandalism and as far as I can tell it is indeed wrote from a neutral POV. As a wiki, the other users are free to re-write the sentence. I was clearly banned as the admin who banned me had literal interest in discussing or compromising regarding the editing of this page. By the way, were I to be unbanned I have literally no interest in editing that page again.
Now to address your other point "why not give reasons why un-banning you would be in the best interests of the community": I stated my interest is to update pages about my micronation, I even proposed a fair solution where I am unbanned for certain time and then re-banned. Why is this in community's interests? Well, individual articles on this wiki are usually project of one person, but there quality reflects on the standard of the Wiki. Would it not be better if my pages were also good quality and high-standard to improve general quality of the wiki? In regards to other matters, I stated to the owner of this site not to such actions again. If you want a list anyway, only articles I will be generally editing are the pages in this template and this category. -- OIMGov (talk) 07:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Alright, after listening to everything you have to say, and after re-visiting the facts of your case: I have decided to ACCEPT your appeal. Just note that you will be on a one strike basis for a while and any infraction will result in being banned again. Case Closed.--Guess I never Miss (talk) 09:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Dionisiy I, Prince of Montescano page
Dear OIMGov, it is not uncommon for a Monarch to claim titles of a state he was exiled from. There are enough examples to be found on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_pretenders#Europe). As such I reverted your removal, but edited it to reflect it is in pretence. Deniz (talk) 13:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)