User talk:JournalScholar

You are a STAR!

		The Missing Barnstar
		You are doing great work here! This award for your efforts is long overdue. – Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 05:34, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Removing unverifiable and unsourced content in violation of WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:RS is not edit warring. I only make good faith edits, provide clear reasons for the edits and always use reliable sources. MastCell gave no warning before frivolously blocking my account.

Decline reason:

It is indeed edit warring, and you were warned here. Favonian (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Why are you claiming you weren't warned? I clearly warned you and you ignored the warning. Dougweller (talk) 19:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I also warned him not to edit war and to engage as well, on the talk page and on his user page. IRWolfie- (talk) 20:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you freely violate Wikipedia policy by including content that violates, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NOR?--JournalScholar (talk) 02:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which edit did I make that violated a Wikipedia policy? Apparently anyone can add unverifiable content and when contented does not have to provide a reliable source. --JournalScholar (talk) 02:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

What edit did I make that violated Wikipedia policy? I would like the specific edit and how it violated policy. All my edits were for removal of unverifiable and unsourced content that violated WP:V, WP:RS or WP:NOR. These were all in good faith and I will hold any of my edits up for administrative review.

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=What edit did I make that violated Wikipedia policy? I would like the specific edit and how it violated policy. All my edits were for removal of unverifiable and unsourced content that violated [[WP:V]], [[WP:RS]] or [[WP:NOR]]. These were all in good faith and I will hold any of my edits up for administrative review. |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=What edit did I make that violated Wikipedia policy? I would like the specific edit and how it violated policy. All my edits were for removal of unverifiable and unsourced content that violated [[WP:V]], [[WP:RS]] or [[WP:NOR]]. These were all in good faith and I will hold any of my edits up for administrative review. |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=What edit did I make that violated Wikipedia policy? I would like the specific edit and how it violated policy. All my edits were for removal of unverifiable and unsourced content that violated [[WP:V]], [[WP:RS]] or [[WP:NOR]]. These were all in good faith and I will hold any of my edits up for administrative review. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}