User talk:JlawLemonT

--Ymblanter (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of tram and light rail transit systems. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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.
The same warning also applies to your recent edits at List of metro systems. Thank you for your consideration. --IJBall (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of metro systems shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Please stop revert warring, regardless of how much you believe to be right. Should you continue, you will be blocked from editing - Mike Rosoft (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --IJBall (talk) 05:32, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong is not a "Country" despite your half-assed attempts to have it labeled as one per your poor arguments on the talk page. In this situation, "Country" means "sovereign nation". Hong Kong is officially a "Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China". Stop changing it.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 12:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do not change "Country" to "Country/Region" either. Hong Kong does not get special treatment in these lists just like every other semi-autonomous region that's in the world and has metro systems.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop changing "China" to "Hong Kong". It is not a country. It is a sub-national region of China.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:38, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do not have a consensus to change the entries for train systems in Hong Kong SAR to not be listed under China. You do not have a consensus to change the definition of "Country" to include Hong Kong SAR. If you do not stop changing "China" to "Hong Kong" on these pages for entries within Hong Kong you will be blocked.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked this account indef per WP:NOTTHERE as it is clearly a sock (SPI filed by a different editor), does not have a signle constructive contribution (a dozen of reverts just today), and continued reverting everything on sight. I believe we need some rest.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not any puppet account of any users and I think that the administrator banned me based on my political view.

Decline reason:

Sockpuppetry was confirmed. Not that it matters, but you also didn't bother to address WP:NOTTHERE. Yamla (talk) 10:34, 28 September 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.