Bizarre Wikipedia Administrators / Wikipedia - Checking it out...

1. Appeal toward Unblock:
Dear Administrators of WikipediaI have no motive for subverting you. I haven't had any motive for "acting against you". What Jonathanfu wants out of his attention, probably outside "his articles" either way, is beyond me. I'm merely looking at quality of articles and think about what people can benefit from reading. I know that most contributors here, at least, the Administrators, are academics and I expect quality approach from them for this reason. So, apart from running in with Jonathanfu, there is very little to point to for me. Most warnings have been pretty speedy as if they are not entirely mediated upon. So I'm with you, but why are you against me? I'm supposed to improve on a behavioural pattern that I'm not aware of. Is it this material on "Assisted Suicide" and the rest, 2 or 3 articles or is it something else? Am I not supposed to be able to write to the article that pro-suicide-legislation should have an "Intellectual Defence"? No, I find this incredible too, also according to my experience with studying at university of "not the worst quality". So tell me, in a better way, what you want and I will probably improve without "selling my soul to the Devil" because I am most certainly with you and, of course, Wikipedia. I've honestly tried to act exemplary both to Wikipedia's 5 Pillars, but also to general service considerations of what the general public may want to read as useful input! Offers (2): I can offer a "lower profile", if that's what you want? It's the smallest thing for me to write less to you and Wikipedia in general. I can also offer to enter a mentor-program if you want it? Good?Sincerely yours,L. F. Olsnes-LeaPS: I also happen to know that Jonathanfu has been the guy who failed to identify the green pyramids on the back of Scientology books, even though the links were only lines above his own statement. I wonder if he even read books. That's how miserable the judgment is of these people so they can safely lean back on their WP:SOAP, WP:VAN, WP:OR, "WP:DEVIL" and "WP:ALLTHENONSENSEINTHEWORLD". If I prevail through this, I want the rights to laugh of these people hideously!!!
2. Appeal toward Unblock:
(Of Unblocking)
Yes, very important. The very document that I've been (partly, at least?) blocked for has no copyright mark on it as a matter of fact. You can check yourself. I also happen to think of a reason for this, exactly that the ECHR (Human Rights of Europe) and CCBE Code of Conduct run hand in hand. They don't ''need'' a copyright on the document, they only need to control the content of the document and see to it that it contains what they have intended it to contain. Again, this also speaks against the judgment of (that) user, Jonathanfu (for how long can you ''afford'' to have him on the team?), but this is a very small point, though. So what do you think? Can I be unblocked some time soon, please?

If Unblock, what articles:
Those on my watchlist, but far more rarely now as I happen to think most issues are finally "out there" and has won over possible obstacles of idiocy, that intelligence has decided these issues and that, therefore, I don't need to write very much here on Wikipedia anymore because of this.

Anything else:My consistent appeal toward quality of articles, caring for the information demand that people may have and contributing to the destruction of illusions (charicaturely, perhaps, such as Scientology representing Satan-writing (or Xenu writing). That CoS promotes religious tolerance and brotherly/sisterly friendship among all people without becoming "evangelist" on this issue, but rather noting the ethics and the autonomy for its followers by pp. 33(?) and a few (by New Slant on Life). That I have consistently trying to remain in the spirit of the Wikipedian 5 Pillars and that I have certainly not taken part in malice here on Wikipedia (like fx. hate-crime). Thank you!
3. Appeal toward Unblock:
(Of Unblocking)
Well, as it now turns out, I am of the sound opinion that the very reason why I am blocked is because I am perceived to "damage" or "disrupt" Wikipedia "in a number of ways", whatever these are. Let me say, please, first of all, Wikipedia is a direct reflection of reality. When there is unrest in Mexico and civil war in Syria, some of this "recoils" back to Wikipedia as well. Given the nature of articles, people begin to write about it or have written about, more or less emphatically for lots of time already. As much as it is disruptive to mention "Cop Killer" by Body Count or write the articles of Rodney King and Ku Klux Klan, I don't admit a fragment of this charge! The World is no place for angels and I think you know very well about it! The bottom line is that I haven't been breaching the Wikipedian 5 Pillars and that I strive to contribute with description and not idiocy! What about now then, please?
;-)
If Unblock, what articles:
As the first "unblock appeal", only the 48 [the real number is 44] or less that I'm now watching, even then with less intensity.
Anything else:
No, not really.

Note: These Wikipedia administrators have definite information responsibilities to the World and here we are with serious issues such as decisions over Euthanasia vs. continued pains of life, also under grievous circumstances, possibly also including episodes of torture and severe traumas. This is not a child's game!
Note2: That blocking on German Wikipedia is simply too little to consider, given a feeble addition of words to 3 TalkPages, hardly ever visited by the general public and a hysterical row over making a "Bild-Datei" file accessible to the general public by definite German search strings, possibly all 3, in this case. So, this is just to puny to mention. Probably, in general, the German should have been /more/ happy than less happy because some things could have been clarified faster by broader information flows, "but who cares???"
Note3: Jonathanfu is noted for, despite having the files right above him, asking for the green pyramids of Scientology, thus, "Jonathanfu Green Pyramids"... There is some other too, like him turning an argument from Pro to Con and thinking he's right in doing so too!

"The exotic side":
So here we have the Wikipedian WP policies, if not the [WP:Voodoo] and the [WP:Spell-on-you]: [WP:Battleground] (who am I fighting?) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BATTLEGROUND#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground , [WP:NotHere], supposedly I'm not on Wikipedia to contribute with information to higher quality articles or to build an encyclopedia, [WP:Competence], and I don't have the competence either if we are to believe their accusations, their schizophrenia/fixation (on "brain" animal as slave in basement)?, [WP:IDHT], that I'm short of understanding because I *don't* convert arguments like Jonathanfu, mistaking the whole argument the other way, and finally, [WP:CrystalBalling], allegedly, I could mistake Wikipedia for being a crystal ball, unknown how it is supposed to happen! Can't we have the [WP:TieFighter] because you don't know your Star Wars movies like your local Wikipedia administrator too? Or the [WP:Create-More-Jedis-for-the-Jedi-Religion] because Wikipedia is afraid of losing one of its articles due to dwindling members of the Jedi-Religion is there truly is any such, although, unknown to Wikipedia is the logical conditional of it all! Cheers!???

en.wikipedia.org
Of course, my user-talk-page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LFOlsnes-Lea !

Note: You know, it must be my hidden autism...!