ARTIKELDIGITAL.COM

more comprehensive block or an escalation to a ban. Shortcut WP:NOTTHEMWP:NOTTHEM You are blocked because of what you did, not because of what others did...

sulmues (talk)--Sulmues 22:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC) Commment: Read WP:NOTTHEM. Every single one of those users was a disruptive ultra-nationalist SPA...

has been present in cases before the Arbitration Committee (regarding WP:NOTTHEM arguments) and at the Administrators' Noticeboard ("How many people have...

account with FrenchTouchLiberal (talk · contribs). Please also read WP:NOTTHEM. Elockid (Talk) 03:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)" Bullet Dropper (talk) 05:15...

of even Additional Chief Secretaries have been deleted. Please read WP:NOTTHEM Uncletomwood (talk) 10:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC) I only brought up the persons's...

Specific pattern of misreading discussion disingenuously: DROPTHESTICK, NOTTHEM, IDIDNTHEARTHAT, falsely attributing broad consensus for "small gang" of...

That's classic WP:NOTTHEM and classic Jake Fuersturm, as can be seen in this edit [25]. Bwilkins accurately described Jake's WP:NOTTHEM approach best here...

That is not even remotely relevant. Not only is it a clear case of WP:NOTTHEM, OberRanks makes no secret of his past account - and your comments are...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. The dispute (and now WP:NOTTHEM accusations in their appeal) with WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Pied Hornbill...

appellant concerning it: the excessive length (above all other things), the WP:NOTTHEM, the beyond stale timeline. Hopefully, some lessons will be drawn for any...

states that she will seek change. So far her talkpage reads like a WP:NOTTHEM best-of. I want her to come back to the project and work in a constructive...

edit warring and sock puppetry. The person should really pay heed to WP:NOTTHEM. –MuZemike 00:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Clerk note: Moved from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet...

we please limit this to the accusation brought against HP1740-B per WP:NOTTHEM. Thanks Arnoutf (talk) 12:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC) I presented the situation...

was done in bad faith. Normchou (talk) 22:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM principle: The focus of this report is your crossing of the 3RR red line...

I'll also note the initial post, at least, has the distinct scent of WP:NOTTHEM about it: noting the poor framing (which, as Rosguill mentions, was addressed...

(UTC) That's irrelevant to whether or not you're edit warring. See WP:NOTTHEM for more commentary on the topic. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:44, 31 May...

break, otherwise one will be enforced upon you. You may wish to read WP:NOTTHEM. @Debresser: your personal opinions about other users are not required...

filing when it looks like they have stopped reverting for now, but their WP:NOTTHEM response on their talk page is not encouraging (and a continued issue for...

language) 21:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC) Again a desperate attempt at WP:NOTTHEM-style deflection...this thread is about the conduct of FOX 52 and yourself...

as you know well, but choose to obfuscate yet again. Also, review WP:NOTTHEM. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 17:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC) That was...

August 2021 (UTC) While he's not currently blocked, I'm waiting for a WP:NOTTHEM explanation.—Bagumba (talk) 10:45, 20 August 2021 (UTC) Bagumba, that is...

against a personal attack block should contain. NOTTHEM is not the sole content of WP:GAB, nor does NOTTHEM read "nothing except grovelling on the belly...

the neutrality of my next comments. Decline this unblock request per WP:NOTTHEM (generally) and site ban per WP:NOTHERE. SashiRolls is obviously a user...

Bushranger is exactly right - you've come down with a strong case of WP:NOTTHEM, and you might want to work on that before the boomerang hits. As I stated...

limited ownership of your mistakes instead doing a lot of blaming others (WP:NOTTHEM) and WP:wikilawyering. It's hard to convince anyone you're going to truly...

little "light reading" to hopefully point this in the "right" direction: WP:NOTTHEM, WP:EW, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:LAWYER, WP:CIVIL... there's more, but this is a...

03:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC) Even though it is for unblock discussions, WP:NOTTHEM has some good advice. My only excuse is that Nableezy was doing it more...

Drmies (talk) 13:18, 27 July 2016 (UTC) Support topic ban Too much WP:NOTTHEM and WP:OWN, and a failure to own up to tendentious editing. OhNoitsJamie...

groups of thugs" is (WP:NPA) --Kmoksy (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. I have been extremely fair to you - twice giving you polite warnings for...

tendentious. Enough said. MakeSense64 (talk) 12:22, 1 August 2011 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM - Even though it talks about being blocked, the principles of that apply...

lesson; let's move on. Eugene (talk) 22:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC) Please see WP:NOTTHEM. If you are blocked, it will be because of your conduct, not because of...

off ranting at KC. Attacking the blocking admin flies in the face of WP:NOTTHEM. FL, can you address why you felt those comments were necessary, and what...

clarification. Ian Cairns (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC) Why don't you see WP:NOTTHEM? WAYNESLAM 21:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC) Because that policy has no relevance...

to give them a chance to self-revert, changed my mind when I saw the WP:NOTTHEM going on. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:33, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Hanam190552 (talk)...

that you did not say so on your or the article's talk page). Also, per WP:NOTTHEM: "Do not complain about other people" - I filed this report in good faith...

articles I feel like editing. I'd also would like to ask you to review WP:NOTTHEM. Broccolo (talk) 19:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC) Broccolo is complaining about...

filter log · block user · block log) GregKaye 18:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. "Enforcing consensus" isn't an exemption from WP:3RR, but the link you...

they brought it up. — Czello 07:26, 25 October 2021 (UTC) Please see WP:NOTTHEM. But yes, I was blocked for canvassing - despite being a new user and being...

log summary. Surely John has advised properly that she might consider NOTTHEM, I just hope to explain to you that again, she is being misunderstood and...

which Tedder believes represents "continued incivility", also citing WP:NOTTHEM as a block reason (see User talk:Daedalus969#December 2009). As an unblock...

last year. I would think that by now you would know such a "defense" (WP:NOTTHEM) doesn't help you at all. Two wrongs still don't make a right. -- WV ●...

content is not the issue. Your edit-warring is the issue. The constant NOTTHEM walls of text only serve to highlight concerns about the problem, not to...

behaviour wasn't great, but that's being dealt with separately (see WP:NOTTHEM). If you are in a disagreement about article content, the first thing you...

to this report - Youreallycan 17:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC) Did you read WP:NOTTHEM? Arcandam (talk) 17:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC) Fair warning, YRC: I have been...

Arbitration sanction.--Nicoljaus (talk) 06:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. Also, that was a false report: Mikola22 was not breaking 1RR. They made...

situation. 88.14.181.97 (talk) 15:45, 22 September 2019 (UTC) Classic WP:NOTTHEM rope to deflect from the fact that not only myself, but Meatsgains deemed...

consequence. He appears to be fairly new, and his repeated WP:IDHT and WP:NOTTHEM-related comments attest to such. Because he is a relative newbie, I am...

Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 11:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC) You should read WP:NOTTHEM. You may need it soon. Viriditas (talk) 11:43, 15 August 2012 (UTC) And...

penalties--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 04:07, 16 July 2017 (UTC) NadirAli: Please see WP:NOTTHEM. Please do provide edit diffs when you cast aspersions on what you label...

and others' misunderstandings of policy to rest.[158][159][160] Also, WP:NOTTHEM. Saucysalsa30 (talk) 12:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC) @SouthernNights: I disagree...

ban. That said, their argument for unblocking is weak. It's basically a NOTTHEM argument that does not address how they would avoid making edits that are...

reference you added. Yet another typical distortion in a vain display of WP:NOTTHEM. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 00:53, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Comment Nevertheless...

continues on the Talk page Terjen (talk) 06:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC) Comment WP:NOTTHEM - the fact remains that this user reinstated the same content 3 times in...

for a period of 24 hours Broke the bright-line of WP:3RR. Also, see WP:NOTTHEM NeilN talk to me 13:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC) Page: Mass killings under Communist...

about a living person", (3)"Her follow-up statements are garden-variety WP:NOTTHEM stuff, blaming everyone else..."; (4) "and to instead cast herself as a...

warring (7 counts of it, to be exact). Also, his unblock requests reek of WP:NOTTHEM. Make of all that what you will. ElectricBurst(Electron firings)(Zaps)...

recognition that he needs to leave Prioryman alone, just a bunch of WP:NOTTHEM nonsense about how awful Prioryman is, how "Moreschi wants to play tough...

disruption is not exempt under WP:3RRNO. This is a brazen exercise of WP:NOTTHEM and deflection. Also, per the text at exception #7, Consider reporting...

out. To answer the rest of your points, please read and internalise WP:NOTTHEM. This is resolved and over, please go back to editing productively. //roux...

reverting against consensus" with multiple unblock declines due to WP:NOTTHEM.[147] Despite the edit summary explaining his addition was reverted because...

User:ChrisO User:FisherQueen User:rd232 User:Moreschi User:Daniel Case WP:NOTTHEM User:Tnxman307 There seems no objection to putting them here as they already...

attempt to corner is no exception. Four involved editors with the same WP:NOTTHEM, and not a single response pertaining to the topic or issue raised. Speaks...

An administrator is not obligated to take action against anyone. The WP:NOTTHEM argument is often raised by users, but, ultimately, it has no basis in...

Their largely WP:NOTTHEM approach to this appeal itself further affirms that notion, I think. - This is certainly not WP:NOTTHEM. First, I mentioned...

paying attention. You're the SPA who is edit-warring over them. See WP:NOTTHEM. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 20:03, 2 May 2014 (UTC) Clearly, you haven't...

by yourself. Lightbreather hasn't touched this article in 6 months. WP:NOTTHEM.--v/r - TP 17:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC) Support, per Statments made by both...

indef block and is continuing the same sort of behaviour. See his classic NOTTHEM post Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#already banned, need alot of help. 94...

Way to be one-sided guys. SilverserenC 16:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. Other comments don't justify what Dream Focus said (not that I disagree...

but have you ever seen WP:NOTTHEM? - Sitush (talk) 17:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the link. (I had not seen WP:NOTTHEM before.) I thought it is...

their few posts to ANI, where they proceeded to attack others, typical WP:NOTTHEM behaviour. Banning them will make it easy to deal with any copyvio mess...

sticks out" after intentionally tripping someone. You should also read WP:NOTTHEM--someone not accepting something you say to that person is not an attack...

unblocked, which failed because of his WP:BATTLEGROUND attitude and WP:NOTTHEM violations, he was eventually unblocked. He very first article edit was...

concern. Those opposed to unblocking in 2018 frequently pointed to WP:NOTTHEM saying that the unblock request focused on others rather than the behavior...

the problem is his editing, I can't think of a more obvious case of WP:NOTTHEM. WCMemail 06:50, 7 June 2017 (UTC) Support, given the evidence of his attitude...

why they were blocked. However, I'm also reading some quite recent WP:NOTTHEM and so I'm wary of letting them go straight back into the topics where...

administrative right? Bcs09 (talk) 17:03, 10 January 2011 (UTC) Consider reading WP:NOTTHEM and WP:TRUTH. Ultimately if you are facing resistance to content additions...

(UTC) Paul-Reus, if you want to be unblocked, I suggest that you read WP:NOTTHEM. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Someone...

22:35, 20 March 2022 (UTC) See WP:NOTTHEM. Abecedare (talk) 23:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC) Indeed. Sorry, but per WP:NOTTHEM you cannot excuse poor conduct on...

Bitton (talk) 22:53, 20 May 2022 (UTC) And now they have posted a very WP:NOTTHEM unblock request. Perhaps it should be declined ASAP. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300...

whether we "provide fuel," or not. The behavior to date is quintessential WP:NOTTHEM NE Ent 03:29, 8 October 2015 (UTC) My first thought was this is a good...

creating or editing with sock-puppet accounts, (3) read WP:GAB, especially WP:NOTTHEM, (4) read it again, thoroughly, (5) probably read it one more time, to...

content of this post focusses on others and not their own editing (see WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDHT). For the topic ban, my advice is to wait six months and if...

(UTC) Two things immediately spring to mind from LirazSiri's comment: WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. The "neutral positive guidance" offered by Abd is...

appears to be an attack on the blocking admin. I have advised him to read WP:NOTTHEM before composing unblock requests. Cosmic Latte (talk) 15:30, 17 March...

other users - such an approach amounts to little more than blatant WP:NOTTHEM. Furthermore, some of the comments above suggest that his emailing campaign...

my concerns were, and are. un☯mi 18:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Mbz1, per WP:NOTTHEM, "You are (were) blocked because of what you did and not because of what...

past attitude in response. Too trigger-happy to edit war and too much WP:NOTTHEM attitude when their behavior was at issue. Others above already summarize...

which is a classic deraiment which cannot justify your misconduct (read WP:NOTTHEM) lets break it down. Going by this user's edit history it is definitely...

disruption is not limited to just the Covid-19 topic area, and the WP:NOTTHEM attitude on display below is indeed troubling. Generalrelative (talk) 05:34...

that the copy of the page that you're pointing everyone to in your WP:NOTTHEM exercise, is actually a copy where the text of Coren's comment is only...

"The guideline does not reflect the practice" campaign. I refer you to WP:NOTTHEM as again you've pointed out others perceived misbehavior as a shield for...

point in a way I could never have demonstrated, classic WP:IDHT and WP:NOTTHEM. You assert the poking that caused the comment can't be discussed, 'cos...

around 4 times, in next around 9 times. After you see an extensive WP:NOTTHEM, milestones far from the reality. - the next other link directly shows...

right direction for all parties involved. But now you have violated WP:NOTTHEM (although this is not an unblock request), in making examples of previous...

as solid evidentiary basis as is possible) that isn't fixated on a WP:NOTTHEM defense. Because that approach is serving you poorly. Crucially, it offers...

blocking admin's conduct (which is beside the point in a block appeal, see WP:NOTTHEM), it doesn't ask for the block to be lifted, or give reasons why it should...

statement because just the other day he explained to the user [88] waht WP:NOTTHEM means. Looks like Shabazz responding to canvasing got a litlle bit confused...

was a block appeal, that reply from CC above would get me slapping a WP:NOTTHEM decline. Just sayin'. (And the more I read it the more I cringe at it....

Better count your positive contributions, if any. have you heard about WP:NOTTHEM?--Mbz1 (talk) 04:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Wow brocolli, your managed to...

Wolfowitz 20:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC) Distraction; belong elsewhere. WP:NOTTHEM.  Chzz  ►  22:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC) Chzz, you are quoting a blocking...

large difference between 'firm' and 'aggressive', Peter. I realize that WP:NOTTHEM is focused on unblock requests, but it applies here to; others' behavior...

pointed out how these were distortions. Despite what he might believe, WP:NOTTHEM does not mean the only legitimate appeal is a plea for clemency, but instead...

beyond me: I do know that she never seemed to understand the concept of WP:NOTTHEM. And still not one example of sock that is possibly misidentified - just...

The block was 24 hours, and the unblock request was clearly against WP:NOTTHEM, and the block expired. Looking at the related thread on her talk page...

can be closed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. This thread is about your behavior, Zug, not BW's. You say above that...

what I would do. Equazcion (talk) 21:47, 21 Nov 2009 (UTC) Nezzadar - wp:NOTTHEM - "...I have no other way of trying to improve..." - Just no. You improve...

(talk) 00:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC) Well, not to be all comparative (WP:NOTTHEM) but...well, as you said, YOU were unblocked. I HIGHLY doubt this guy will...

problem was being reasonable. As for your third and fourth points, see WP:NOTTHEM, which talks about blocks, but the concept is still valid here. As for...

a number of admins Power.corrupts (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. If you have concerns you should raise them in the proper way, that does...

making such characterizations in the future. Though I am well aware of WP:NOTTHEM, I feel the need to point that editor filing this AE report is a case of...

seem to be operating under the delusion (I'm not consciously violating WP:NOTTHEM here), that Paisan1's behaviour WAS NOT an aggravating factor, namely the...

entire time blocked refusing to accept being blocked and blames others (WP:NOTTHEM) is and the fact he immediately jumped right back is (WP:NAM). By itself...

intentionally placed it there for her to use in the first place (Read also WP:NOTTHEM). --Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 09:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC) Support (retroactively)...

the kitchen sink at me. Twafotfs (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:54, 30 December 2011 (UTC) Precisely. Twafotfs (talk)...

myself" :-) Thank you for proving the block was necessary, valid, and just. WP:NOTTHEM might just be a good thing for you to read while you're blocked. (talk→ BWilkins ←track)...

scrutiny? Has he made a WP:NICETRY? Does he consider and comply with WP:NOTTHEM? Has he actually agreed that huge portions of his behavior are unacceptable...

for being blocked", and "Is the request free of egregious WP:NPA or WP:NOTTHEM violations"? Something that's relatively simplistic and leaves out room...

(talk) 22:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC) Stricken, as their subsequent WP:NOTTHEM response to the unblock decline has made it clear that I overestimated...

excuses don't cut it in my view, and basically constitute an example of WP:NOTTHEM. If an editor is working in a hostile environment, they should seek to...

me. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:27, 20 August 2011 (UTC) Classic wiki-lawyering NOTTHEM unblock request, BTW. Claims that "I should warn you that all of you will...

remember correctly. 66.127.52.47 (talk) 03:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT appear to be the two most relevant issues here, and...

16:29, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Oppose - the user should probably read WP:NOTTHEM and be sure to understand and respond to the reason of the block (copyright...

then I will. Adam4267 (talk) 21:37, 10 August 2011 (UTC) An appeal to WP:NOTTHEM is a poor strategy. At best, you'll find others sharing the ban. Your best...

so much the sort of unblock request which is declined with a link to WP:NOTTHEM. That reply doesn't alleviate the concerns which I raised at WP:AE [74]...

be because the supposed "Unblock requests" are full of WP:OUTING and WP:NOTTHEM - as such, they are not valid unblock requests, and have now simply led...

line, a good approach is to block them both while directing them to WP:NOTTHEM. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:13, 10 February 2019 (UTC) I would not like...

whole rut. Nguyen1310 (talk) 08:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC) BTW, keep WP:NOTTHEM in mind. It appears Zrdragon's only defense is that if he should be blocked...

led to the topic ban in the first place, instead tossing out a lot of WP:NOTTHEM that, to be blunt, has no grounds in reality. The comment you link here...

January 2015 (UTC) Technical 13 is right back at it [223]. Based on a WP:NOTTHEM "Not my fault attitude" - see [224] for a discussion of how a) his canvassing...

though it ticks some of the boxes, I find your appeal too vague, with a WP:NOTTHEM sandwiched in the middle. To recap: Bill Stevenson, Jill Biden's former...

people on the other side of the debate were behaving so badly. See WP:NOTTHEM. EdJohnston (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2012 (UTC) Oppose: The concept of a...

The reporter is well familiar with this fact. And I do understand WP:NOTTHEM, I am just trying to add context and explain that there was no selection...

especially enjoy his dodging attitude at WP:DRN. He is pulling a classic WP:NOTTHEM behavior. Comments like "I strongly advise you to look through Elvenscout742's...

demonstrated your lack of intellectual honesty". I am well aware of WP:NOTTHEM, and I brought the above example only to show that not every comment should...

Decline. Wow. I'm actually almost enthralled by how brazenly against WP:NOTTHEM this is. Third, “Check Users” have too much power. That's a spectacular...

this time. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC) Clear WP:NOTTHEM activity in the request tops off the issues raised by Blade and Sarek....

(UTC) After double checking, I'm still seeing an irrelevant case of WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDHT on your part. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC) The...

(UTC) Negative, IrelandCork, you are not blameless, and the more you WP:NOTTHEM it up, the worse it looks for you. You (and Krackduck) intruded into Goddard2000's...

inappropriate conduct. This is inappropriate in an appeal; see, by analogy, WP:NOTTHEM. You do not address your own conduct by which you accuse the other user...

"it wasn't completely their fault" statements show a very concerning WP:NOTTHEM-ish attitude that prevents me from being able to support at this time....

"Unban me because I did nothing wrong" is a pretty easy oppose. Also, WP:NOTTHEM applies.--Atlan (talk) 09:31, 9 May 2019 (UTC) Oppose - disingenuous at...

me down with you.) Sergecross73 msg me 19:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM Sædontalk 19:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC) Support. Considering this user's...

start a formal investigation. This smear/attack-anyone-who-disagrees WP:NOTTHEM defense is just what we're dealing with with these editors and this is...

even the most basic tests of academic rigour. Now you need to read WP:NOTTHEM. Guy (Help!) 09:42, 18 March 2016 (UTC) The reasons you were active on...

malicious intent. UtherPendrogn (talk) 20:40, 28 November 2016 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM is worthy of a review based on that response (even though you're not blocked...

hard place in a response to that. I really don't want to respond per WP:NOTTHEM, because I'm really tired of always talking about the other party, and...

long term fronts open". His comments above are a classic example of WP:NOTTHEM; he blames other editors for his problems and doesn't accept his own culpability...

not absolve a particular editors whose behavior has been addressed. (WP:NOTTHEM) Finally, SPECIFICO's attempt to tie editors to MilesMoney in someway is...

added by Amamedli (talk • contribs) 15:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Read WP:NOTTHEM.142.105.159.60 (talk) 16:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Well the IP editor has...

the community at large in this case. Additionally, the request fails WP:NOTTHEM and is suggestive of a desire to carry on a grudge. --K.e.coffman (talk)...

saying the same thing. I further refer to TakuyaMurata's continued WP:NOTTHEM arguments that everyone except themselves is responsible for their current...

mind, then ask another editor or report it instead of reverting. Read WP:NOTTHEM; this applies equally to your situation. 3) Per your discussion with Toddst...

been better if the apology had been more fulsome and more aware of WP:NOTTHEM. There is no appetite for any further sanction on this occasion, but further...

commemorate the event [354]. I really don't like to participate in WP:NOTTHEM activity here, but frankly speaking, I'd suggest that this calls for a...

be well-acquainted with Wikipedia terminology as he told me to read WP:NOTTHEM when I first posted at ANI about him. The person seems to be targeting...

depending on how serious you view the situation, but WP:BROTHER and WP:NOTTHEM types of arguments are almost never considered accepted reasons to unblock...

was blocked indefinitely with less personal attack. I got the reply WP:NOTTHEM. In this time Materialscientist blocked at least 8 accounts tagging me...

warring parties apart and trying to impose some order. Please don't go WP:NOTTHEM on us, that is never a good look. Guy (help!) 13:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)...

Someone65 to familiarize himself with WP:CANVASS, WP:NPA, WP:POINT and WP:NOTTHEM would be in his and Wikipedia's best interests. The canvassing alone (after...

18 February 2018 (UTC) Increase appeal time to 1 year for failing WP:NOTTHEM and making a misleading request. Deliberately bringing up my false block...

them back, is a violation of the IBAN. I suggest stop blaming others WP:NOTTHEM. Also if I am correct the IBAN was apart of your unblock conditions, which...

counting !votes. Most arbs were also not impressed with Sashiroll's WP:NOTTHEM behavior, dubious requests for extensions, etc., so even if the ban was...

argument for why the community at large should accept their viewpoint (WP:NOTTHEM) especially in light of the recent block appeal that was rejected. Hasteur...

Goroshi ! (talk) 23:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC) Sennen goroshi, see WP:NOTTHEM. Guy (help!) 23:55, 12 December 2019 (UTC) I also was surprised to see...

December 2020 (UTC) And their unblock request is an exquisite example of WP:NOTTHEM. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:24, 18 December 2020 (UTC) The discussion...

disruptive, but that's not a situation we can continue to tolerate. (WP:NOTTHEM also applies here) Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:02, 4 December 2020 (UTC)...

June 2020 (UTC) @FloridaArmy: Please refer to "What about...." and WP:NOTTHEM. Your actions and behavior are at discussion here. Hasteur (talk) 17:04...

to not make it not broken so much, and start leading by example (not WP:NOTTHEM) or just walk away, . . . walk away. We are looking for relevant guideline/policy...

June 2021 (UTC) Shibbolethink spend much of their long response arguing NOTTHEM. Accusing the filer of ASPERSIONS does not excuse their behavior.[56] Terjen...

status quo is wrong. Last Contrarian (talk) 21:35, 18 August 2016 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. Oh, and law of holes. Guy (Help!) 22:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC) This road...

would have been done a long time ago. They had enough time to violate WP:NOTTHEM multiple times, hadn't read a single policy, guideline or essay linked...

an argument for why the appellant should not have been blocked; see WP:NOTTHEM. The same goes for the appellant's complaints against SPECIFICO. These...

No boobs, no credits! El_C 12:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC) So basically WP:NOTTHEM? PackMecEng (talk) 13:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC) Oof, PME, the point that...

understand that we are discussing your editing and not anyone else's. See WP:NOTTHEM. You may not perceive your continued defense of your edits as trying to...

(talk) 08:58, 10 March 2017 (UTC) WP:TBAN seems appropriate given the WP:NOTTHEM, WP:IDHT and everything else. Guy (Help!) 18:43, 10 March 2017 (UTC) I...

it in any meaningful way, instead they are still carrying on about WP:NOTTHEM. I have absolutely no faith what-so-ever that they will contribute constructively...

that we focused more on the editors’ actions rather than the content. WP:NOTTHEM aside, it was a way forward but rather than move on they have recently...

June 2010 (UTC) Roland, my last comment on this AE, but what about WP:NOTTHEM? I can't see how one editor behavior justify the other one behavior, what...

My very best wishes, from my perspective, I'm not sure all of your WP:NOTTHEM points are that conducive to the success of this appeal. I, for one, think...

walls of text and out of context guidelines, eventually exemplifying WP:NOTTHEM. Ranger was clearly keeping up with what was going on on Drmies page, but...

reasoning, RexxS. --MrClog (talk) 13:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Oppose per WP:NOTTHEM. serial # 18:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Oppose. The acceptable options are:...

commentary, however I'm going to get the popcorn out as jusifications of WP:NOTTHEM/WP:WAX only end in more pages being clobbered. Hasteur (talk) 20:37, 5...

See Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, specifically the section WP:NOTTHEM. --Jayron32 19:15, 24 January 2020 (UTC) Also WP:ASSHOLE. Narky Blert (talk)...

would be difficult to formulate a more impressive worked example of WP:NOTTHEM than is found in the first four (!) paragraphs of Tillerman's statement...

routine and uncontroversial. Additionally, the IP is encouraged to read WP:NOTTHEM (and indeed m:WRONG). Guy (Help!) 22:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC) The following...

Spamcheck) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) WP:NOTTHEM behavior on usertalk ([98] including accusing others belonging to the Mafia...

Guy submits on appeal is unconvincing. Any misconduct by others (see WP:NOTTHEM), or the presence or absence of consensus for any specific content, does...

blanking of sourced materials. Their defense seems to be an example of WP:NOTTHEM with an admission of biting. Given that the editor was topic banned for...

content (and Nishidani's response is more of the same, disregarding WP:NOTTHEM). The "Piss off" is a personal attack even though it was submitted already...

missing edit summaries. Arianewiki1 (talk) 08:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM. Policy recommends the use of edit summaries; systematic disuse of them...

ceteris paribus.--RegentsPark (comment) 00:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC) Decline WP:NOTTHEM appeal. I can personally attest to the appellant's reoccurring problems...

heading should reflect that in fairness to them. However, trying to argue WP:NOTTHEM (which seems to be the case) by saying the deleting admin is more at fault...

of complaints against others. It can therefore be disregarded (cf. WP:NOTTHEM). We can therefore proceed from the assumption that TheTimesAreAChanging...

all of an apology to 1292simon. Everything Carmaker1 has to say is WP:NOTTHEM excuses. This is someone who doesn't get it because they can't. A ban from...

of any dispute. FYI I have declined Asilah1981's unblock request per WP:NOTTHEM. Black Kite (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC) Disagree / Oppose topic...

Wikilawyering, and by the most recent draft statement they're preparing, which is a bunch of WP:NOTTHEM deflection. ~Swarm~ {sting} 21:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)...

(UTC) Yep, you've clearly not taken the advice given to you to heart. WP:NOTTHEM might be helpful in a short while... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 04:24...

evidence shows it to be), it would still be Wikilawyering and arguably a WP:NOTTHEM violation. Guy (Help!) 00:27, 23 February 2019 (UTC) This section is to...

LM2000 (talk) 03:07, 11 March 2017 (UTC) Support That is some serious WP:NOTTHEM behaviour on his talk page (&history). 3 month block followed by indef...

WP:POLEMIC, and evidence that JuanRiley doesn't get why he was blocked, i.e. WP:NOTTHEM, WP:IDHT. Much of this content isn't even diffs that could be useed in...

Onceinawhile, which even if true don't count in Plot Spoiler's favor (see WP:NOTTHEM), and which at any rate are not accompanied by actionable evidence and...

warnings and edits against not just one sockpuppet were being discussed (WP:NOTTHEM isn't for sock puppets of blocked editors or block evaders, it's when two...

advise you to remain WP:CIVIL in your conduct towards me and to remember WP:NOTTHEM. My edits are not "black propaganda edits" and neither are they "anti-Turkish"...

own conduct, not because of the conduct of others (see, by analogy, WP:NOTTHEM). The conduct of others should therefore not be discussed further here...

application, and neither is any alleged misconduct of the other parties (see WP:NOTTHEM). Indeed, these continued allegations of misconduct (which are not necessary...

understand the scope of his topic ban and is clearly not adhering to WP:NOTTHEM in his appeal but instead blaming others for any of the recurring problems...

reason why this appeal should be successful, all I see is a lot of WP:NOTTHEM most of which isn't even true as I have shown. The only person responsible...

topic areas like the Balkans are watched very strictly by admins. Per WP:NOTTHEM it's not an excuse to say that others also behaved badly. I have repeatedly...

Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC) Doc needs to read WP:NOTTHEM at some point. --Calton | Talk 10:57, 24 November 2016 (UTC) @Doc9871:...

personal attacks and unsubstantiated complaints about other editors (see WP:NOTTHEM), but not a word about the only thing that matters: the appellant's own...

with a warning, but ZScarpia's response is just too subpar, in its WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDHT. I will stop using low quality sources for BLPs would have...

deals with how Rumition will abide by policy rather than on the more WP:NOTTHEM aspects of this one--Cailil talk 14:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC) Would it be...

themselves even absent the topic ban, and also for the personal-attack-laden WP:NOTTHEM rant below and elsewhere. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)...

Malformed request and a violation of WP:NOTTHEM. Declined. Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:12, 23 September 2018 (UTC) The following discussion has been...

September 2010 (UTC) Too many words that do not matter, too many abuse of WP:NOTTHEM, a few conspiracy theories especially for one, who was not going to comment...

are expected to address their own behavior, not that of others, see WP:NOTTHEM. Indeed, these accusations being unsubstantiated, they violate the principles...

discussing.The user has clearly acted against consensus and reverted. WP:NOTTHEM Please explain what his edit has to do with WP:OR argument? The diffs are...

January 2011 (UTC) Xebulon: Your statement is mostly beside the point per WP:NOTTHEM. This is about you, not others. [161] is an unacceptable personal attack...

policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct} WP:NPA WP:CIV WP:NOTTHEM WP:POINT WP:DISRUPT Efforts to work with Mk are too numerous to list. He...

information you think are opinions?"[25] Discuss block while ignoring WP:NOTTHEM.[26][27]  Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me D4iNa4 (talk)...

Pakistan and Afghanistan but not any one of them, which is also wrong. WP:NOTTHEM is for unblock requests and here it is relevant to give details on background...

5-point reaction. Why then did you say my whole 5-point reply gets into WP:NOTTHEM territory? Why did you ignore all the other facts and arguments? 2. Why...

substantive grounds. The section "MrX" in the filing is both fails WP:NOTTHEM and is borderline harassment of the editor who submitted the original request...

me, but I comply with it." Basically, I statements. You've pointed to NOTTHEM, which is largely the same idea. If an admin would block over comments...

time-served, and a lengthy list of grievances. It's quintessential WP:NOTTHEM and bad-faith wikilawyering. I mean, she's soup-spitting you guys about...

distracts from the actual topic at hand? Something along the lines of WP:NOTTHEM, which is aimed specifically at people filing an appeal. --Oatitonimly...

ban and point to the fact that each of the 4 have failed to follow WP:NOTTHEM. Marvin 2009 interacts with dispute resolution as if it was a court or...

attempted to claim that the other editors were the ones at fault (See WP:NOTTHEM). Having been fortunate enough not to be blocked for this blatant edit...

demonstrated a lack of proper understanding of the policies and/or guidelines (WP:NOTTHEM, etc) they cited in their statements,[85] seeking sanctions for legit reasons...

completely incapable of dropping the stick. He also seems to not understand WP:NOTTHEM. 142.105.159.60 (talk) 13:33, 9 August 2016 (UTC) Comment from talk page...

in Q5, and the answer to Q3 concerns me because it sound like using WP:NOTTHEM as a defence; your idea that "I imagine I will spend very little time in...

are reacting in a negative way, and has doubled down with a series of WP:NOTTHEM arguments.[46][47][48] Two wrongs do not make a right. There once was a...

take it that his comment above was actually just another example of WP:NOTTHEM instead of an honest acknowledgement of fault? That would be disappointing...

of even Additional Chief Secretaries have been deleted. Please read WP:NOTTHEM Uncletomwood (talk) 10:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC) I only brought up the persons's...

Cavalry (Message me) 01:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC) Classic case of WP:NOTTHEM. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC) Ϫ 09:46, 5 December...

behavioral policies. Get it together, and next time you see this kind of NOTTHEM argument, just say sorry, it does not work. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:43...

the diffs in my evidence section. This is never acceptable here and WP:NOTTHEM applies if someone else does it first - this is why we have AN/I. Noformation...

Components:V S M 19:44, 12 November 2011 (UTC)  Not done As above. WP:NOTTHEM arguments don't go well in undeletion discussions either (talk→ BWilkins ←track)...

Beeblebrox did nothing wrong; it makes no difference what anyone else did - WP:NOTTHEM - Herostratus had ample time to simply stop edit-warring. The RFC on the...

WP:DRUNKEDIT WP:REHASH WP:THETRUTH Galileo was a jerk WP:CIR Gov't agent WP:NOTTHEM WP:FREESPEECH God's chosen WP:NOTFORUM Wikipedia is not America Free space...

idea for you to take a look at WP:UNBLOCK and WP:GAB (particularly WP:NOTTHEM) and then at WP:OFFER to see if this is something you would be willing...

Even during the case, these pages were mostly classic ignoring of WP:NOTTHEM anyways. Kingofaces43 (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC) Thanks Kingofaces43...

edit summaries and responses of a remarkebly similar fashion (incl. WP:NOTTHEM); [119] - [120] - [121] - [122] - Krzyhorse22; "I don't give a shit who...

The response copied from Phanuel's talk page is a classic case of WP:NOTTHEM, and to my mind can hardly be dignified with a response. SuperMarioMan...

whether we "provide fuel," or not. The behavior to date is quintessential WP:NOTTHEM NE Ent 03:29, 8 October 2015 (UTC) My first thought was this is a good...

The IP range is registered to a mobile hotspot. A user keeps violating NOTTHEM on their talk page but have >10,000 edits. You decide to change the block...

in this area are not valid rationales for opposing this; again, it's WP:NOTTHEM. The user continued to add controversial material, even during this discussion...

WP:NOTTHEM Admin and Nick I will let you guys decide whether my account is a sock of user MohanishBora but I do want to highlight to you that the user...

made apparently in response to this discussion, which have a pretty high NOTTHEM content. I'll gladly accept criticism of the system, and I have plenty...

connected. Some conservative commentators have pulled an IRL version of WP:NOTTHEM and pointed at Obama to deflect attention from Romney, but no one can "connect"...

Cowboy/Jake is making is just another example of his long history of WP:NOTTHEM. Repeatedly Cowboy/Jake starts Wiki-wars, then feigns innocence, and wears...

wrong. The incivil editor has been warned and is unrepentant (reading wp:NOTTHEM would be good) and is not de-escalating. The content dispute itself is...

Callanecc; actions by others are mentioned only as context. I don't see how WP:NOTTHEM is relevant. --Crash48 (talk) 14:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC) @HandThatFeeds:...

imagining it. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 03:10, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Read WP:NOTTHEM again. Pay attention to what it says. Your answer is there. --Guy Macon...

not Copernicus, not anything except your sock puppetry. Please read WP:NOTTHEM. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC) This comment makes...

remember correctly. 66.127.52.47 (talk) 03:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT appear to be the two most relevant issues here, and...

of the material (and yes that should not have happened either, but WP:NOTTHEM). WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE could be cited for an argument that the two editors...

the thing to do would be to follow the advice given in WP:OFFER and WP:NOTTHEM, and show you're willing to eat a little crow (even if its fake crow)....

mischaracterizations of my actions from years ago" as it's getting into WP:NOTTHEM territory. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 16:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)...

Bishonen | talk 01:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC). Aren't we getting into WP:NOTTHEM territory? --WGFinley (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC) Disagree. He clearly...

conduct forum for WP:CTOPs). For the time being I'd suggest reading WP:NOTTHEM and focus on regaining trust from the community. Kowal2701 (talk, contribs)...

(PingMe) 06:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC) Is Grandmaster's comment violating WP:NOTTHEM? --Dallavid (talk) 22:05, 28 February 2023 (UTC) Comment by others: General...

reply above. — EarthDude (Talk) 10:51, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Please read WP:NOTTHEM. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:52, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Kautilya3, you have edit...

signed, Rosguill talk 21:29, 18 July 2026 (UTC) The fact there are still WP:NOTTHEM issues makes me frown somewhat, unfortunately. - The Bushranger One ping...

in fact, understand why NotThem concerns are being put forth by those who glance at the surface of the matter. The NotThem concern requires the other...

return a topic. Instead, Sashirolls clearly seems to still be taking a WP:NOTTHEM attitude about how disruptive they have been and instead is trying to shift...

Support but I might reconsider if they withdraw the request and review WP:NOTTHEM.Simonm223 (talk) 10:44, 10 September 2025 (UTC) Simonm223 just to point...

disruptive and thus santionable? Tvx1 01:21, 19 July 2023 (UTC) See WP:NOTTHEM. Also actually read WP:VANDALISM, edits you perceive to be against consensus...

WP:NOTSYNTHESIS WP:NOTTA WP:NOTTECHNICAL WP:NOTTEMP WP:NOTTERTIARY WP:NOTTHEM WP:NOTTHERAPY WP:NOTTHERE WP:NOTTHESAURUS WP:NOTTHISAGAIN WP:NOTTHOUGHTPOLICE...

issues on your end that multiple editors are cautioning you about. Read WP:NOTTHEM. When you pester someone to the point of frustration and then run to ANI...

(UTC) Oppose. As others have mentioned, their appeal is filled with WP:NOTTHEM language, which is a pretty strong indication they're going to continue...

imposed. On top of that the unblock request could be a case study for WP:NOTTHEM. I won't call for an indef yet, but when the block expires Lardlegwarmers...

simplify them and would make it harder to derail the original AE request with NOTTHEM arguments - back-and-forth BOOMERANG accusations can make a report almost...

but I would not recommend that based on the case you've made here. WP:NOTTHEM is also helpful reading. Star Mississippi 02:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC) Thanks...

editors who have tried to tell you there's a problem here. See also WP:NOTTHEM. I genuinely wanted to see an outcome where you acknowledged the issues...

reverting. Tu quoque-style argumentation doesn't really work for blocks; WP:NOTTHEM describes this. As administrators are never required to use their tools...

Trumpism on that page) I would say that you should probably look at WP:NOTTHEM a bit. I've had my conflicts with Kowal2701 but they're not the ones who...

US election? 2. What really caught my eye here though is Sashirolls' WP:NOTTHEM attitude about their sanction and related behavior. It's dismissive and...

yoinked by RickinBaltimore after their unblock request was nothing but WP:NOTTHEM. - The Bushranger One ping only 17:39, 8 August 2026 (UTC) The following...

so. Possibly the only thing that our process doesn't really cover in WP:NOTTHEM is how to handle the latter case of an overzealous cowboy admin, but even...

(talk) 19:50, 6 June 2023 (UTC) I am declining this unblock request per WP:NOTTHEM. Annabais, be aware that future invalid unblock requests may result in...

sincerely apologize for the comments that I made, and also for violating WP:NOTTHEM. The ban has had an impact personally. I made me reconsider all the previous...

to them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v MUSHROOM 18:54, 23 April 2026 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM and @Willywilly1111 you're doing yourself absolutely no favors. Please...

two and a half years prior invalid; it does not. Their appeal fails WP:NOTTHEM, fails to acknowledge that their own edit warring is the reason for their...

needed because you're appealing your IBAN, and should be mindful of WP:NOTTHEM in your appeal. Star Mississippi 12:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Another question...

make me align with their annoyance, as Lyon describes it. @Dicklyon WP:NOTTHEM is helpful. Star Mississippi 01:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Oppose. The encyclopedia...

didn't address any reasonable reasons for unblocking, and also contained WP:NOTTHEM polemic (mentioned on the talk page in question). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)...

September 2025 (UTC) You are not yet sanctioned. But you should read WP:NOTTHEM as you are not helping your case here. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:25, 16 September...

seems, but their unblock request is otherwise a sterling example of WP:NOTTHEM. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:08, 2 June 2025 (UTC) spamublock'd....

some consensus from the community. Additionally, tell them to read WP:NOTTHEM and WP:CITEVAR if they get blocked and want to appeal, thanks. (No hard...

Arguments based on prior user blocks risk violating the principle of WP:NOTTHEM and deflect from addressing verifiable policy breaches in the article itself...

me (despite the admin on your talk page previously advising you to WP:NOTTHEM). Furthermore, from what you wrote here and on the article's talk page...

what they did wrong and that it's on them, not "misinterpreting" or WP:NOTTHEM, unblocking can be done by anyone. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:03...

understanding of their past disruption in AfDs and shows a very strong WP:NOTTHEM mentality. I also support impsosing a full AfD TBAN as Spicy said above...

they should also be blocked, doesn't mean we should unblock you per WP:NOTTHEM. Also while ToBeFree has threatened to extend the block to the talk page...

merits a sanction but only if JFD is sanctioned as well (roughly per WP:NOTTHEM), the consensus was clear. Although editors cannot be expected to remain...

until we learn otherwise. Also, you might take a look at the section WP:NOTTHEM; although it's written for appealing blocks, it's also wise advice in this...

convincing people that you won't edit war in the future rather than more WP:NOTTHEM. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC) Statements...

Wikipedia and beyond the competence issue, there's still a great degree of WP:NOTTHEM in that complaint. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC) The...

evidence free personal attacks on other contributors." This is not an NOTTHEM comment for me, but rather I am pointing out that AndyTheGrump abuses the...

(UTC) Support. Their attitude in this thread is combative and full of WP:NOTTHEM and WP:IDHT. Statements like It says that we should verify content created...

very interested in hearing it. X4n6 (talk) 20:41, 21 May 2023 (UTC) WP:NOTTHEM regarding "abdicated good faith", whatever that means. There are no recent...

in question does not paint them in a good light either. It is giving WP:NOTTHEM and not comprehending their actions and the effect it has on others and...

Their talk page isn't encouraging either on the fighting attitude and WP:NOTTHEM: When warned about edit warring at the page, FM in the edit summary said...

TPA at this time. • Quinn (talk) 23:03, 16 February 2026 (UTC) [96]] WP:NOTTHEM of sorts. Borgenland (talk) 09:43, 18 February 2026 (UTC) This is no longer...

with misbehavior by other editors. Stop pouring gasoline on the fire. WP:NOTTHEM. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:38, 23 May 2026 (UTC) Did you write this, on this...

Einne (talk) 05:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC) What caused the problem isn't WP:NOTTHEM... please try to see this from a practical standpoint. Removing autopatrolled...

of 'excluding' another editor's comments for bludgeoning, but this WP:NOTTHEM is immaterial to the accusation of personal attacks, which you have continuously...

aspersions at other people in order to defend them - even if true, WP:NOTTHEM applies; it does not excuse EMsmile's own behavior. The interpretation...

Trumpism on that page) I would say that you should probably look at WP:NOTTHEM a bit. I've had my conflicts with Kowal2701 but they're not the ones who...

topic ban. Courcelles (talk) 17:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC) Classic WP:NOTTHEM. An appeal is a chance for you to demonstrate why you no longer need to...

consider an editor's behavior in general when deciding on AE actions), WP:NOTTHEM, or to essentially state in a very conclusory way "My way is right, so...

their behavior was disruptive. That whole line of argument is just WP:NOTTHEM-style deflection. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)...

others will be moved to the sections above. I suggest BobNesh read WP:NOTTHEM. If someone appeals a block then we generally expect them to show some...

Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:53, 31 July 2026 (UTC) The combination of a WP:NOTTHEM response, clear issues with their ability to assess sources, and particularly...

therefore was not in fact a TBAN violation. The response is textbook WP:NOTTHEM, and I would propose a TBAN from ARBPIA. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:41, 5 February...

will be moved to the sections above. Decline this entire appeal per WP:NOTTHEM. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:25, 30 July 2025 (UTC) As much as my sympathies...