User talk:72.79.34.240

Welcome!

Hello, 72.79.34.240, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Zefr (talk) 04:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Vegetarianism. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. See the article history. The definition has been in place for a considerable time by consensus of numerous editors, and would not be changed with the addition of a non-mainstream source. Please practice editing in your sandbox and ask for help at the Teahouse. Zefr (talk) 04:21, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

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.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Vegetarianism, you may be blocked from editing. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for disruptively failing to understand basic communication, using the talk page to debate matters with no academic support, and generally wasting everyone's time pushing for changes based on that inability to comprehend. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Ian.thomson (talk) 22:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Following guidelines, don't understand what Ian.thomson is doing

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. SQL^{Query me!} 22:20, 3 December 2018 (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.

(edit conflict) You've been trying to edit an article based on your inability to understand basic words in it as well as your lack of awareness of English grammar. You argued that vegetarianism isn't a practice because eating vegetables is not a skill, and that vegetarians aren't abstaining from meat because they're somehow not the ones stopping themselves from eating meat. You keep insisting that it's improper to explain something with a negation, which is utterly wrong ([1] [2]). You've tried to push for a definition of vegetarian of eating vegetables (even though plenty of non-vegetarians people eat both meat and veg).

The meanings of "abstain" and "practice" were explained to you -- you ignored the explanations.

You filed an inappropriate RFC, and the people who responded directed you to past consensuses regarding the lede, which you've clearly ignored.

You had to ask what "you" meant.

The only reasonable conclusion is that you're a troll or else are completely incompetent. The only other person I've encountered whose English was so confidently wrong was an advocate of Scientology Study Tech -- and I taught EFL. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:23, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

I do not believe my edits were disruptive. I edited the page with a verifiable source. Then moved it to the talk page and asked for commentary. Vegetarianism is foremost not a philosophy. Read my comments on the talk page that are closed. It is not abstinence. Meat eaters abstain from eating vegetation. This is made evident not only by logic but by study of our food chain foundation. SQL what is Ian.thomson referring to, if there is a Wikipedia essay is it legitimate. I don't know incompetency. - 72.79.34.240 (talk) 22:39, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

You don't get to decide if your edits were disruptive. "I don't know incompetency" is yet another example of why you should not be editing the English Wikipedia. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

What part do you consider disruptive? I am following guidelines. If you noticed the discussion is on hold and I am asking SQL for their input. - 72.79.34.240 (talk) 22:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

It's been repeatedly explained to you. You've demonstrated that explaining things for you does no good. I'm revoking talk page access. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:58, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

---