User talk:Jatlin1

Welcome!

Hi Jatlin1! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Favonian (talk) 17:57, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Har du set min sag? Jeg synes, det er sindssygt korrupt det her sted. Undskyld, hvis man ikke må snakke på dansk. Jeg har rigtignok kommet til at redigere under IP, men hvis man ser de beskeder igennem fra den IP, vil man se, at jeg utallige gange har slettet beskederne fra den IP, fordi jeg har ved en fejl ikke været logget ind. Men alt andet nævnt i begrundelsen har intet substantielt på sig. Jeg synes, det er totalt rystende. Jatlin1 (talk) 14:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Machine translation: "Have you seen my case? I think this place is insanely corrupt. Sorry if you are not allowed to speak in Danish. I have indeed come to edit under IP, but if you look through the messages from that IP, you will see that I have deleted the messages from that IP countless times because I was not logged in by mistake. But everything else mentioned in the justification has nothing substantial about it. I find it totally appalling."

Man kunne jo bare have forslået at jeg krydsede boksen "forbliv logget på" af. Jeg ved godt, det er en meget simpel opgave. Den har jeg dog nu fuldført, men hvorfor er der ingen interesse i dialog om problemet? Jeg er rystet. Jatlin1 (talk) 14:26, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Machine translation: "You could have just suggested that I ticked the "remain logged in" box. I know, this is a very simple task. However, I have now completed it, but why is there no interest in dialogue about the problem? I am shaken."

Jatlin, two things. Do not edit without logging in anymore: you have made a large number of edits without logging in and that is disruptive. Second, some of the material you're adding on Talk:Elon Musk is essentially a kind of low-level trolling, because you are asking questions that no one with a modicum of knowledge of how Wikipedia works would ask. So, I strongly suggest you practice editing Wikipedia by working on articles and learn our various policies and guidelines along what way. The stuff on the Musk talk page is disruptive and just creates more work for our volunteer editors who have to address the things you raise. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:21, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please read Wikipedia:Single-purpose account. ~ HAL333 22:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback guys, @HAL333, @Drmies! Jatlin1 (talk) 23:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~ HAL333 20:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the concerns, @HAL333. You have misunderstood the definition of an edit war though. You can read about it here WP:WAR Jatlin1 (talk) 21:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. ~ HAL333 05:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not me, lol. Jatlin1 (talk) 11:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why have I been blocked without any reason? Jatlin1 (talk) 14:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is virtually nothing substantial in that other than editing from IP, but if you notice the history of contributions from that IP, you will notice that I have tried to delete all recent messages from that IP because I have mistakenly written from IP. So nothing suggests that I have had any intentions of being deceptive. This is not justified. Jatlin1 (talk) 14:20, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Jatlin1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The basis and evidence behind the reason of my block seems extremely thin and unsubstantiated except editing from IP, but if you notice the history of contributions from that IP, you will notice that I have tried to delete all recent messages from that IP because I have mistakenly written from IP. Indeed, I think I have suceeded with actually deleting all these messages. So nothing suggests that I have had any intentions of being deceptive - nor have I actually been deceptive because these messages have quickly been deleted right after posting them. I have also marked the box "Keep being logged on" now! And I will continue to be aware of the importance of having this box marked, thanks. I don't agree that I have participated in edit warring. I have tried to enter dialogue about every single issue - the opposite hasn't been true, sadly. Some people, especially HAL333 and QRep2020 have not wanted to enter any dialogue, but have reverted my edits without any attempts to enter a dialogue. I have dealt with this problem (with regards to failed dialogue) thoroughly here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Jatlin1_reported_by_User:HAL333_(Result:_Indefinitely_blocked) in my response to HAL333. I don't see that I have participated in disruptive editing in any way. There is absolutely no evidence of that. Additional note: It might appear like I reduce the issue of writing from IP - the truth is that I wrote from multiple IP's before making this account, but in all instances I declared my identity, for example, calling myself "Copenhagen University IP", thanks. Jatlin1 (talk) 14:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=The basis and evidence behind the reason of my block seems extremely thin and unsubstantiated except editing from IP, but if you notice the history of contributions from that IP, you will notice that I have tried to delete all recent messages from that IP because I have mistakenly written from IP. Indeed, I think I have suceeded with actually deleting all these messages. So nothing suggests that I have had any intentions of being deceptive - nor have I actually been deceptive because these messages have quickly been deleted right after posting them. I have also marked the box "Keep being logged on" now! And I will continue to be aware of the importance of having this box marked, thanks. I don't agree that I have participated in edit warring. I have tried to enter dialogue about every single issue - the opposite hasn't been true, sadly. Some people, especially HAL333 and QRep2020 have not wanted to enter any dialogue, but have reverted my edits without any attempts to enter a dialogue. I have dealt with this problem (with regards to failed dialogue) thoroughly here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Jatlin1_reported_by_User:HAL333_(Result:_Indefinitely_blocked) in my response to HAL333. I don't see that I have participated in disruptive editing in any way. There is absolutely no evidence of that. Additional note: It might appear like I reduce the issue of writing from IP - the truth is that I wrote from multiple IP's before making this account, but in all instances I declared my identity, for example, calling myself "Copenhagen University IP", thanks. [[User:Jatlin1|Jatlin1]] ([[User talk:Jatlin1#top|talk]]) 14:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=The basis and evidence behind the reason of my block seems extremely thin and unsubstantiated except editing from IP, but if you notice the history of contributions from that IP, you will notice that I have tried to delete all recent messages from that IP because I have mistakenly written from IP. Indeed, I think I have suceeded with actually deleting all these messages. So nothing suggests that I have had any intentions of being deceptive - nor have I actually been deceptive because these messages have quickly been deleted right after posting them. I have also marked the box "Keep being logged on" now! And I will continue to be aware of the importance of having this box marked, thanks. I don't agree that I have participated in edit warring. I have tried to enter dialogue about every single issue - the opposite hasn't been true, sadly. Some people, especially HAL333 and QRep2020 have not wanted to enter any dialogue, but have reverted my edits without any attempts to enter a dialogue. I have dealt with this problem (with regards to failed dialogue) thoroughly here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Jatlin1_reported_by_User:HAL333_(Result:_Indefinitely_blocked) in my response to HAL333. I don't see that I have participated in disruptive editing in any way. There is absolutely no evidence of that. Additional note: It might appear like I reduce the issue of writing from IP - the truth is that I wrote from multiple IP's before making this account, but in all instances I declared my identity, for example, calling myself "Copenhagen University IP", thanks. [[User:Jatlin1|Jatlin1]] ([[User talk:Jatlin1#top|talk]]) 14:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=The basis and evidence behind the reason of my block seems extremely thin and unsubstantiated except editing from IP, but if you notice the history of contributions from that IP, you will notice that I have tried to delete all recent messages from that IP because I have mistakenly written from IP. Indeed, I think I have suceeded with actually deleting all these messages. So nothing suggests that I have had any intentions of being deceptive - nor have I actually been deceptive because these messages have quickly been deleted right after posting them. I have also marked the box "Keep being logged on" now! And I will continue to be aware of the importance of having this box marked, thanks. I don't agree that I have participated in edit warring. I have tried to enter dialogue about every single issue - the opposite hasn't been true, sadly. Some people, especially HAL333 and QRep2020 have not wanted to enter any dialogue, but have reverted my edits without any attempts to enter a dialogue. I have dealt with this problem (with regards to failed dialogue) thoroughly here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Jatlin1_reported_by_User:HAL333_(Result:_Indefinitely_blocked) in my response to HAL333. I don't see that I have participated in disruptive editing in any way. There is absolutely no evidence of that. Additional note: It might appear like I reduce the issue of writing from IP - the truth is that I wrote from multiple IP's before making this account, but in all instances I declared my identity, for example, calling myself "Copenhagen University IP", thanks. [[User:Jatlin1|Jatlin1]] ([[User talk:Jatlin1#top|talk]]) 14:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I've translated your Danish comments, one from much earlier, and one from a bit ago. Please do not post any more comments in Danish here.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 16 December 2022 (UT

Black Kite, you are writing "Since it turns out that the registered account and the multiple IPs that have been raising issues in this section are all the same person, and that editor has now been blocked, it appears logical to close this before they find their way here with yet another IP." Black Kite, all my messages from other IP's are from before I made a new account. Whilst it is true that I accidentally wrote new messages from my IP after I created my account, all those messages were deleted very quickly. I don't like you suggest that I'm being deceptive around my personality when that is completely unsubstantiated. I even wrote in the BLP thread: "I agree with everything. I'm the person who wrote this thread[...]". I'm being completely transparent, so I would suggest you to retract your suggestions. Yes, I have written from multiple IP's before creating my account, but I have always been transparent and called myself "Copenhagen University IP" or in other ways declared I'm the same personality. I know this hasn't been very practical, but I have only been on Wikipedia for 2 weeks, and suggestions about that I have intented to deceive have no basis in any way.

Zaereth, you wrote on Elon Musk thread on BLP board "If you think the problem is editor behavior, then you're at the wrong noticeboard. That's what ANI is for. This board is for BLP violations, yet you have shown me no such violations here?" I have sent examples of violations of BLP policies. BLP policies must adhere, for example, to verifiability. In this thread I point out how information is not verified [[...%22_is_not_backed_up_by_any_sources|The_entire_sentence_%22Musk's_statements_have_provoked_controversy_[...]%22_is_not_backed_up_by_any_sources]]. I will suggest you to ctrl+f. I have no idea about how to make a link that directs you to the specific section, sorry - if you think that is a problem, and you don't wanna ctrl+f, then please explain how I can do that, thanks

Welcome!

Edit warring

Archives

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

December 2022