User talk:72.86.137.160

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).

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

---

Request reason:

An aggressive and badly misinformed administrator (Drmies) arbitrarily blocked me for 3 months after I reverted a single one of his (poorly explained) reversions of my edit. He and a fellow administrator (Nigel Abe) plainly have confused my edits with those of at least one other editor (who has a different IP address). They have also threatened to block that editor, on similar grounds, but then backed off after the other editor told them off for their blatant ignorance and confusion. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:68.197.116.79 The upshot is that the other editor(s), like I, tried to add the label "ultranationalist" to the Brothers of Italy page, a label that some defenders of the Brothers don't want to have linked to it. This despite the fact that many experts on extreme right wing parties and many journalists have described the Brothers as "ultranationalist". I and others have cited a variety of articles to justify the label (and there are plenty of others we could cite), but no matter what we cite there are some long time defenders of the Brothers who immediately delete it. Sometimes they offer a thin pretext (they personally don't trust the cited RS), sometimes they offer no reason. Sometimes they have also challenged other widely used descriptors of the Brothers' party. They claim they have consensus on their side to ignore RS uses of the term "ultranationalist". That's an extraordinary argument to make. In any case, one of the ways of claiming to have consensus is by pretending that all the other editors who advocate for including the label are secretly the same person - and on that false basis they are now threatening or (in my case) actually blocking the users who make straight-forward citations to justify the inclusion of what they don't wish to see included. It's not a coincidence that Drmies reverted 2 of my edits, with barely anything like an explanation, but doesn't hold himself to be engaged in edit warring. It's also relevant that Drmies learned shortly after he blocked me that he had confused multiple different editors who happened to be in agreement with each other, but instead of unblocking me he just let it stand.72.86.137.160 (talk) 20:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

WP:GAB will explain to you how to craft an acceptable unblock request. Yamla (talk) 21:22, 30 April 2020 (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.

I did nothing worthy of a block. The administrator who blocked me did so under gross confusion. What part of that is less than clear?

Just to note that I blocked the IP from this range for personal attacks a couple of days ago [1].--Ymblanter (talk) 05:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

---