User talk:TheFeralCat
Hello, I'm NawlinWiki. I noticed that you recently removed some content from List of apex predators without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:11, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of apex predators, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:11, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at List of apex predators. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
apex predators
Hi, see this and there are many others from internet search that support the Hyenas as apex predators. If you disagree please explain your reasons here. Govindaharihari (talk) 19:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
You need to open a chat on the talkpage and get a WP:CONSENSUS for your edit. "both African wild dogs and both hyenas are preyed on by big cats" they are not preyed on for food, they are not prey at all, they are competitors as the www links agree with.Govindaharihari (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
September 2015
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN talk to me 19:53, 13 September 2015 (UTC)Block extended to one month for continuing to sock. --NeilN talk to me 15:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
TheFeralCat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I'M NOT SOCKING! I'M BEING RIGHT! Look, killing can lead to preying on! And not all dogs that kill prey on! My autism means i'll NEVER let it go. EVER. Because you could put kill, with can lead to preying on, because not all dogs prey on them! TheFeralCat (talk) 15:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Regardless of whether you're right or not, it does not absolve you from being subject to our policies prohibiting the use of multiple accounts or block evasion. I strongly suggest you find a way to edit within the rules and guidelines on Wikipedia or you may be blocked indefinitely. Mkdwtalk 18:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Dude, seriously? I'm on the autism spectrum, and while I realize everyone on the spectrum is different, I have a hard time believing your story of "my autism won't let me stop". Obviously, you stopped when you left your computer for a while to go eat, go to the restroom, and go to bed. My suggestion is that you shut off the computer or just don't log into Wikipedia at all until your block is up. But yes, you are edit warring -- look up the definition here. You are also edit warring while using a sock to continue doing it. Both activities will keep you from editing Wikipedia. In order to keep editing Wikipedia, you have to abide by the "rules" (Wikipedia policies). If you don't do that, you won't be allowed to edit here at all. Your choice -- I suggest you make the right one. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 15:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
TheFeralCat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
oh. i know what socking is now. i didn't know i'd logged out, so i logged in. And i didn't know i was logged out. i wasn't avoiding the block, isn't my IP address the same when i'm signed in? i'm sorry it turned out like this. i'm just saying i made the right point about the cats and you can't block me for being right. i have evidence. And i've got a cold and been feeling rubbish, had a bad day, and my autism is the cause of all this.
Decline reason:
If you have a condition that you feel makes you unable to follow Wikipedia policies, then this isn't the project for you. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:03, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
TheFeralCat (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
"And i've got a cold and been feeling rubbish, had a bad day, and my autism is the cause of all this."
Now I know you're full of shit. People with autism don't go around saying "I don't feel well and had a bad day and it's all because of my autism" because they don't typically notice that things they do are due to autism. I don't know what kind of game you're trying to play here, but it's not going to win you any friends or allies. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:05, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
TheFeralCat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I'm going to say the same reason because the admin who read it only focused on one thing... and swore at me... anyway, i didn't know i logged out. I thought the ban would be on me logged out and logged in, because the IP address would be the same for my account, or that's what i though. I didn't intentionally avoid the ban. Please don't be rude and swear at me.
Decline reason:
Logged in or out, you continued your disruptive editing on the wildcat and Iriomote cat articles, and that constitutes block evasion. Further, repetitive requests will lead to your talk page access being revoked. Favonian (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
blocked
i'm not allowed to make more block requests, but i did one again because an admin was rude. And i continued to make edits because i though the ban had been lifted. i thought "aren't i banned? well, it seems not". And i also was doing the right thing. i was being accurate. Just because an admin has more power, doesn't mean they can say that i'm "full of sh*t" too. i just want to make things right. if the cat pages have just one or two edited sentences, i don't see what's the problem, especially if they're accurate. i am actually an expert on all cats, as well as hyenas and marine iguanas. i'm just trying to do the right thing and not make people be mislead. i never wanted this to happen. i just wanted to edit a page to be accurate. And why can i edit no pages, i though it was only the wildcat and the iriomote cat? Well, i don't know... Just please understand.
And here we go again...
Well, it looks like you're back to doing the same sorts of edits that led to you being blocked before. Why do you think the situation is different now? - CorbieV☊☼ 22:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Seems like you just decided to ignore my last explanation at the article talk page. Please consider this a final warning. With the next edit of this kind that tries to push your personal misconceptions against confirmed references, I will ask to have you blocked again.-- Elmidae (talk) 07:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
And I have no issue blocking you again if you continue to make changes without consensus. --NeilN talk to me 16:05, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
- And his rationale is still the same:[1] - CorbieV☊☼ 16:20, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
October 2015
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at List of apex predators. @NeilN:, want to push the button or should I? - CorbieV☊☼ 16:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
- @CorbieVreccan: That edit was done before my warning so I won't block. But I hope TheFeralCat realizes that any more edit warring will result in a lengthy block from me. --NeilN talk to me 16:59, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN talk to me 11:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)TheFeralCat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
What did i do wrong? i made it correct and i made a fair point. Who's the cat expert here? TheFeralCat (talk) 11:34, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
TheFeralCat, you need to read, in full, WP:OR and WP:RS. You have continued to take the position, "but I know I'm right" and failed to provide even remotely reliable sources, for example, Yahoo answers are questions answered by the general public and therefore not considered even remotely reliable as a source. You've also infringed on original research by searching for photos to support your arguments, also something not considered a reliable source. Failure to abide by these rules and continuing to cause disruption may result in an indefinite block under WP:IDHT and the removal of your talk page privileges. Mkdwtalk 13:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- Regarding "who is the cat expert here?" - not you, User_talk:NeilN#dogs_again, User_talk:NeilN#User:TheFeralCat_is_back_for_more_nonsense_:.2F --NeilN talk to me 11:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- No, really, i'm a cat expert. Also when dogs kill humans, they don't eat them by the way. TheFeralCat (talk) 11:49, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
TheFeralCat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The yahoo thing was answered by a cat expert. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone. i did provide sources, and it's a fact, a lot of the things i edit. A fact. TheFeralCat (talk) 13:49, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
TheFeralCat, you're clearly interested in cats, but you're not here to build an encyclopedia which requires strict requirements in terms of providing reliable sources. It's clear you haven't bothered to read any of our policies. Further, your refusal to "get it" falls under WP:IDHT and I do not think that there is much else we can do for you if you cannot help yourself. You were previously warned about further disruption and repeated unblock requests. Your short history here you've resorted to edit warring, socking, disruption, WP:OR, more edit warring, and more disruption. This is the point where any contributions you make greatly burden the project and as a preventative measure from certain future damage, you are hereby blocked indefinitely. Mkdwtalk 13:54, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
November 2015
TheFeralCat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #16077 was submitted on Jul 03, 2016 17:17:39. This review is now closed.