User talk:6YearsTillRetirement

Required notice regarding editing articles related to American Politics

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Per your ping

I didn't mean to imply there had been any fabrication. Rather, at WP:RS, it says the author of a piece can affect reliability. I still disagree with Kyohyi's interpretation, but it is plausible. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 16:53, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Shinealittlelight (talk) 18:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, 6YearsTillRetirement, 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:

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 ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Mathglot (talk) 23:32, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/6YearsTillRetirement. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 23:53, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23 is simply incorrect. I am not associated with the University of Houston in any way and I have no interest in them, and I have not used any account but this one. I spent most of last night helping bail out my sister-in-law's flooded car and transferring her and my niece to my house while this incorrect assessment based on a vexatious request was put into place. I also question Bbb23's being the one to make any decision since they seem to have attitude issues and previously threatened me for asking a polite question.[1] 6YearsTillRetirement (talk) 16:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: @Doug Weller: @Bishonen: I am asking you all to take a look, please. It appears that the editors responsible for the vexatious request waited mere moments to act once they found a sympathetic ear in Bbb23.[2][3][4] I believe I was correct that both the SPI and accusations were in bad faith and meant as revenge for @Bishonen:'s topic-ban of Jweiss11. At this point, I have little option other than to appeal this factless decision by Bbb23. 6YearsTillRetirement (talk) 16:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought: obviously, those who have petty power will do what they want. I've rethought bothering with an appeal that, since I am innocent, will not be treated seriously since the "advice" page demands admissions of guilt even from the innocent. Feel free to look it over and notify me if you want to but I have two more people living in my house now, and my time is likely to be eaten up taking care of family anyways, rather than dealing with what one of my colleagues described after reviewing this as "typical wikipedia administrators, just assume they're a teenage autistic drunk on petty power". I wish that weren't an assessment I now agree with but on reviewing Bbb23's talk page it is clear that Bbb23 is suffering from severe burnout, has major attitude issues, and saw me as a place to express his frustrations; and further that most of the rest of wikipedia is treating Bbb23 and so many other editors like him as a Missing stair rather than address an underlying toxic culture of burnout and attitude problems on this website. 6YearsTillRetirement (talk) 16:27, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any more edits about other areas of the project, either directly or indirectly, will result in revocation of your access to this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23 is not a teenage autistic drunk on petty power. And you can appeal this via a regular unblock request, of course. I'm sorry, but that you would say that about Bbb is not cool, and that you think "teenage autistic drunk on petty power" is in any way acceptable is sad. Drmies (talk) 20:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]