User talk:Marrakech

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, Marrakech. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 21:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Your comments

Hello Marrakech, sorry for troubling, I noticed your messages, and I fully understand the fact that you feel to give explanations and ask to get unblocked, but I suggest you use the available channels (local appeal procedure/contacting the U4C in case of systematic failure of UCoC enforcement). I should point out to you, being an uninvolved meta-wiki sysop, that metawiki is not an appeals court. So your comments about your block are out of metawiki scope, and I'd ask you to use the channels mentioned above and to avoid posting off-topic comments, many thanks for your understanding. Best regards! Superpes15 (talk) 21:23, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Ciao Superpes15, thanks for your message. I fully understand what you are saying, but this is the issue: I consider it very important that the misconduct of the group of Dutch administrators I am referring to is documented somewhere outside the Dutch Wikipedia, because pages there can be completely deleted by them without warning (as happened with my user page), and users who support me are blocked on the spot by them for perfectly normal remarks, as has happened to Wimpus and Apdency. (While I am writing this, admin XxBlackburnxx has extended Wimpus’s block for alleged “continued project-disrupting behaviour & violations of the UCoC", even though Wimpus merely responded in polite terms to Daniuu’s justification for the original block.)

Furthermore, I am afraid I have little confidence in a UCoC procedure, because the very administrator who blocked me indefinitely, Ciell, has close ties with numerous people involved in the UCoC. I therefore hope you can understand my position and my reasons. Marrakech (talk) 10:09, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that you cannot turn to us Meta admins or post on irrelevant locations. We're not the right place for that. The only place where you could potentially "misconduct of the group of Dutch administrators I am referring to is documented somewhere outside the Dutch Wikipedia" is a subpage on your user page. The U4C operates in its own space which we cannot interfere either without very good reasons. Leaderboard (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Leaderboard, thanks for your valuable suggestion. I followed your advice. Marrakech (talk) 11:57, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Note to admin: The only page that was deleted was this user's page. I quoted the content of said page here, feel free to run this through Google Translate to understand what we are dealing with here...

Genderideologie
Omdat ik nogal eens verzeild raak in discussies over de genderideologie, volgt hier in een notendop hoe ik erover denk.
Er zijn twee geslachten: man en vrouw.
Een man die zegt dat hij een vrouw is, of zich als zodanig identificeert, is en blijft een man.
Een vrouw die zegt dat zij een man is, of zich als zodanig identificeert, is en blijft een vrouw.
Non-binair is een loze term. Een man die zich non-binair noemt, is een man die zich blijkbaar niet erg mannelijk voelt. Een vrouw die zich non-binair noemt, is een vrouw die zich blijkbaar niet erg vrouwelijk voelt. Meer heeft het allemaal niet om het lijf.
Wie het hier niet mee eens is, heeft uiteraard alle recht op zijn of haar mening en mag die ook vrijelijk uiten, zelfs als anderen die mening ongerijmd of kwetsend zeggen te vinden. Hetzelfde geldt vanzelfsprekend voor degenen die het wel met mij eens zijn: zij hebben net zoveel recht om openlijk lucht te geven aan hun kijk op de zaak.
(Zo zou het in ieder geval moeten zijn, maar de werkelijkheid is anders. Wie de genderideologie onderschrijft, kan vrijelijk met zij verwijzen naar een mannelijke wikipediaan die zegt zich een vrouw te voelen. Maar zij die er anders over denken, mogen die man niet met hij aanduiden. Doen zij dat toch, dan worden ze geblokkeerd. Hun wordt dus het elementaire recht ontzegd om zich conform hun overtuigingen te uiten. Het blijft opmerkelijk hoeveel wikipedianen, die zich vast heel democratisch gezind wanen en hoog zullen opgeven van de rechtsstaat, deze tirannie toejuichen.)

I can tell you from years of experience that this user has no interest in pursuing the right ways of appeal or following procedures, the reason my collegue asked for review is because he moved his behavior from our wiki to this venue and I can ensure you this will not stop unless he's stopped.

ContextCreator (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I understand that you've little confidence in procedure, in my opinion due to a wrong perception of the thing, since there is a lot of attention to conflicts of interest and I don't believe in the slightest that the work of the functioneers depends on friendships. When working with the aim of enforcing policies, priority is given to the serenity of the entire community. Although I completely understand that you want to share your situation outside the project, I cannot help but point out that they are out of scope where you posted them and, therefore, cannot be accepted (as per policies I linked above). Thank you again for your understanding Superpes15 (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

@Superpes15 @Leaderboard As I said in my comment above, and as you can see with his latest edit here, this user will not stop going from page to page discussing his viewpoints unless someone stops him. You pointed him towards the right place, yet he found another talk page to keep going. And if you shoo him away there, he will go somewhere else, but never the appropriate venue. ContextCreator (talk) 13:32, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

That page is a response to the question asked by Ciell concerning the indefinite block she imposed on me. I feel I have a right to clarify the implications of that response for the validity of said block. But I’m of course more than happy to move the text I posted there over to my user page. Marrakech (talk) 13:49, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Let's clarify that the User: subpages are not a free space in which you can post what you want. The meta inclusion policy also applies there. It seems to me that you are continuing to complain about the block and meta is not the right place. I'll not repeat the fact that you are out of scope here. I already warned you and I personally have no intention of doing it again after this message! Thanks for your understanding Superpes15 (talk) 13:54, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Note (for the record): other than stated above the block of Wimpus was not extended, just its status altered (access to Talk page) which was reverted within three hours. - Brya (talk) 02:33, 6 August 2026 (UTC)