User talk:Eng.M.Bandara

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

May 2019

[edit]

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to University of North Carolina at Charlotte shooting, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Specifically, if you want assistance in how the community interprets Wikipedia policy, then I suggest reading the policies themselves. Thank you. ——SerialNumber54129 11:14, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: I think your speedy closure of my nomination was uncalled for. We already have a list for school shootings in the United States, I don't think an independent article for each and everyone is justified. Others have expressed a similar view elsewhere on Wikipedia, and you didn't give them an opportunity to be their arguments forward, the discussion should have been allowed to run its course. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 22:06, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There’s no point in letting a deletion debate “run its course” if it snowball’s chance in hell of succeeding. And if you look at List of school shootings in the United States you will see that by no means is there an article on each and every one. It is decided on a case-by-case basis according to the genersl notability guideline, which this article clearly passes. Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:48, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Talk:STEM School Highlands Ranch, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Drmies (talk) 00:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies How does my Rfc constitute disruptive editing? I will take this to the ANI, you're harassing me. Take your warning back and reinstate my RfC immediately --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 00:59, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem, no I'm warning you. Go ahead and take it to ANI. But don't harass me while doing so please! Drmies (talk) 01:00, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Eng.M.Bandara: If you do this [1] again, I will block you for disruption. You don't get to control the discussion you opened. By the way, "homeslice" isn't an insult, but I redacted it anyway, since it could be misconstrued. Acroterion (talk)

Mr. (I presume) Bandara: I would like to offer my sincere thanks for your dropping of the stick with regard to this matter. I think you do reach the right conclusions, though I think that, like me, your knee jerk responses can be sub-optimal. I understand the instinct to counter-punch online, but I would respectfully suggest that taking a few minutes before publishing a submission can do wonders. Obviously, this is just unsolicited advice, but I really do wish you the best. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 00:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Acroterion (talk) 02:46, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be moving toward another problem with your approach to other editors at Talk:STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting. Please stop treating every discussion at that talkpage as a battle, and please remember that WP:BLP is policy. Gender identity is one topic that must be handled carefully, especially when the subject isn't a public figure and whose personal circumstances are ambiguous and poorly researched. Acroterion (talk) 03:08, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Site ban request

[edit]

[[2]] Hell in a Bucket (talk) 04:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hell in a Bucket under what grounds? --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 04:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making highly provocational statements, after already making sexist comments very recently. I think you have exhausted the community's patience.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

El_C 04:43, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Eng.M.Bandara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Blocking admin INVOLVED, discussion at ANI still underway, I am seeking review to allow ANI to countinue. I had apologised for the comments made to the user and removed it myself in less 3 minutes, it was already subject or previous ANI and dealt with. I have nothing to do with how the admin feels to be " provocational statements" I was expressing my opinion on what I felt as the arbitrary application of WP:BLP at the discussion. I never disruptively edited any articles, this is clear from my recent contribution at 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 04:52, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

El_C was not in a dispute with you, and therefore was not involved. "Uninvolved" does not require that the admin has literally never interacted with you. In any event, one other administrator has stated that he would have blocked you if El_C had not, and I would have done the same. So even if you hypothetically succeed in arguing involved, it makes no difference. Simply put, you are toxic, and no one should have to deal with you while trying to build an encyclopedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

That is plainly false. I am an uninvolved admin that just happened on that ANI report. El_C 04:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

El_C Sorry, I thought you were involved at the previous ANI. However, I still think that the current ANI should be allowed to continue for further consensus. In regards to the indefinite block, I have made substantial contributions to Wikipedia, I personally do think this block is unjustified when I was expressing my opinion. I didn't vandalise or disruptively edit any articles. Let me put it another way, how would like me to 'adjust' my behaviour to contribute to Wikipedia positively. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 05:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The 18th century is ====> thataway. Until you find the 21st century on your moral compass I'd suggest it logical to assume you won't be welcomed back. In most cases, indefinite does not mean infinite. This may be an exception. El_C or whatever admin rejects the unblock request, please revoke TPS. WP:UTRS can deal with this troglodyte. Seeing him (?, as no self respecting man could possibly think that way) spew excuses makes me want to puke. John from Idegon (talk) 05:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see room for adjustment at this time. El_C 05:12, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unjustified block for a long term contributor to Wikipedia. Also, an indefinite block is only justified for cases of persistent long term abuse. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 05:12, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please limit your usage of this talk page to unblock requests only. El_C 05:15, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my recollection, I have never interacted with the user before. El_C 05:17, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eng. M.Bandara, your access to editing this talk page has been revoked. El_C 05:24, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • (edit conflict) I commented just as the ANI was being closed, and I left what I'd written directly below. To reiterate what I said there, I support a block because the attitudes that you've expressed are regressive and incompatible with the norms of our community. We welcome a variety of different viewpoints on Wikipedia, but one thing we cannot and will not tolerate is casual sexism or misogyny. Wikipedia already has a less-than-hospitable editing environment for women; we don't need to allow the situation to become even more problematic. If what you say is really what you believe, then I strongly advise that you take the time to examine what the underlying causes of your prejudices towards women may be. Come back to us only after you've done so. Kurtis (talk) 05:43, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Eng.M.Bandara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25206 was submitted on May 15, 2019 05:47:42. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 05:47, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • If it is not clear, unless you are willing to accept that rape is rape and quit with the victim-bashing, you are not welcome to edit Wikipedia. You are not welcome to any community with such a detrimental mindset. You are replaceable. But I do understand, the mindset might be a product of the environment we are used to. I have added a few links that you might read to inform yourself.
Hope you will dedicate yourself to learning better. --qedk (t 桜 c) 08:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Eng.M.Bandara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25209 was submitted on May 15, 2019 09:06:50. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 09:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Eng.M.Bandara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25220 was submitted on May 16, 2019 01:12:51. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 01:12, 16 May 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Eng.M.Bandara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25222 was submitted on May 16, 2019 02:09:34. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 02:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Eng.M.Bandara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25232 was submitted on May 17, 2019 00:45:23. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 00:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1010#Siteban_req DlohCierekim 17:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]