Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word User talk:Ilovemydoodle. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word User talk:Ilovemydoodle, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say User talk:Ilovemydoodle in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word User talk:Ilovemydoodle you have here. The definition of the word User talk:Ilovemydoodle will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofUser talk:Ilovemydoodle, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
No. But you can wait a week, it's only a week block. Please try to behave a bit more sane after that. Nobody wants to baby-sit you. Equinox◑08:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
No. It's clear you are simply incapable of contributing constructively - every time after your block expired you just found a new way of being disruptive. This one will not. — SURJECTION/ T / C / L /07:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Surjection Do you really think that I am trying to be disruptive? My first block was for a mistake I made when I was very new to editing. My second block was because the admin misunderstood what I was trying to do. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Koavf Some of Surjection's other recent blocks here also appear to have been made prematurely. For example: This user, who made two non-constructive edits and was then indef'd. Not trying to attack him (or anyone for that matter), I just think that it might need to be looked into. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 09:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Just look at the edit history of this user. They've already been blocked on two other WMF sites as a timewaster, and I'm inclined to agree. It doesn't matter whether he's trying to be disruptive (which to me looks like that is at least partly true), but he just clearly is. — SURJECTION/ T / C / L /09:37, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Surjection And how is that related at all? That had to do with me misusing noticeboards, nothing at all to do with vandalism or disruptive editing. Also, I will (hopefully) get appealed on those two wikis soon as well. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 09:39, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Justifying a block with by saying that the user was blocked on an another wiki after the original reason was proven false isn't a good reason for maintaining a block. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 09:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Koavf Doesn't the policy say to revert all edits by block- or ban-evading users? I know that because this is (probably) an open proxy of some sort, it will have some legitimate users that are not blocked or banned, but since a large portion of them are, shouldn't the assumption be that the edits are bad (and should be reverted) and if they turn out to be good, they can be reinstated later? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 08:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Koavf On most small wikis, if no local policy contradicting with the policy of the equivalent-language wikipedia exists, it is usually assumed to follow the wikipedia version of that policy. So I would assume that it would be the correct thing to do here. But, even if you disagree, I still don't understand how that justifies any negative behavior, let alone an indefinite block.
Also, I think it's worth pointing out the difference in reaction between this wiki and every-other wiki I had interactions relating to this situation. Most wikis did not care at all, some gave a warning, followed by me explaining and having that warning remove, and a few, e.g. Yiddish Wikipedia, thanked me. But, this was the only wiki where I was given no warnings or messages and just blocked inexplicably.
Quite interesting that some on a completely different wiki in a completely different language seeing me seemingly make disruptive edits assumed good faith and thanked me, while the English wiki, seeing me make good edits with occasional mistake, blocked me indefinitely. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it's often true that smaller wikis just follow en.wp policy by default, so I understand assuming it, but this is not really that small and does have some well-developed policies and procedures. I also agree that I don't see a strong rationale for an indefinite block here. I'm not really in a place to start warring with an admin or try to undermine another trusted member of the community, but I am struggling to understand what is so disruptive that it requires an indefinite block. I don't see any diffs provided that are obviously bad and I took a look at a few random ones that seemed just fine to me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯13:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Unblock
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed:
Block was falsely made, as I was mass-reverting edits by a (shared) IP range (whose edits are mostly from vandals and LTAs, but contain some legitimate contributions) and was not intentionally vandalizing pages. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 06:57, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
