User talk:2604:6000:D786:6C00:FC0B:14FC:18B9:6346

February 2019[edit]

You currently appear to be 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. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. CrispyCream27 • talk • user page 01:17, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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).

2604:6000:D786:6C00:FC0B:14FC:18B9:6346 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why are you blocking me? I am the one who has provided detailed, rational, and well-reasoned responses on the talk page of the article in question. When certain people like CrispyCream27 and GoodDay are unable to respond to my points with relevant and rational comments of their own, they resort to this underhanded method of censorship. You should be blocking "CrispyCream27" and "GoodDay" who mainly engaged in personal attacks and false accusations against me, all without ever reading any of my replies, without ever paying attention to the content and progress of discussion, because their responses to me were mostly irrelevant to the main topic of discussion or merely regurgitated the same comments which I had already addressed in earlier detailed replies to them.

Decline reason:

Requests that talk about others are not considered. You were blocked for what you did, not for what others did. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2019 (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.

I hate to be all dumb about this, but I blocked you for edit warring because you were edit warring. You were warned, there's a link to the definition, you continued, you get blocked. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@2604:6000:D786:6C00:FC0B:14FC:18B9:6346: I can't speak for GoodDay but I did not engage in any type of personal attack. I was simply pointing out the wrong in your logic in the most reasonable way I could. If you were somehow offended by this, then I apologize. We presented you with reliable sources while you countered with zero sources. You went off personal logic and didn't care to look for reliable sources when you were asked to. Obviously the final decision is up to the admin reviewing your unblock, but I don't see any reason why you should be unblocked, considering that it is only for 24 hours. CrispyCream27 • talk • user page 04:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@IP you may want to review WP:NOTTHEM and rewrite your request before it's declined. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 06:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:2604:6000:D786:6C00:FC0B:14FC:18B9:6346 reported by User:CrispyCream27 (Result: ). Thank you. CrispyCream27 • talk • user page 01:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019[edit]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 03:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.