User talk:MrSaul76

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 19:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MrOllie, I have responded to you per your request. I find your edits of pages highly unprofessional as you seem to know nothing about what is relevant on the pages in question. MrSaul76 (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 03:25, 24 July 2021 (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).

MrSaul76 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What personal attack have i performed? I asked a question of a user on their Talk page after a very apparent Sockpuppet event by ElKevbo! It is obvious he is working with MrOllie to remove information from the site. Further, i did not attack him in any way, i meerly asked how the pages he reverted have been improved by the removal of most of the relevant information. Isn't the idea of WP to provide a platform to share information? Why is everyone on here so adamant to censor it? MrSaul76 (talk) 03:31, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have made a grand total of 20 edits here. So far you have called various editors vandals, mindless, vindictive, and accused one of carrying out a vendetta. All because they did not agree with you. Wikipedia is not a battleground and your level of hostility is not acceptable here. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 03:39, 24 July 2021 (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.

This unblock request makes me think that I need to extend the block. Acroterion (talk) 03:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HighInBC:, @Acroterion: have any of the administrators actually read the edits by MrOllie? Has nothing to do with agreeing with me, but rather is a question of what make his opinion the only opinion? Is the the sole source of information on BSAFE or TLS implementations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrSaul76 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators do not get involved in content disputes in areas where they are acting in an administrative capacity. Being right also does not make hostility acceptable here. You should be glad that you are only under a 31 hour block. Many users with your short history being disruptive get indefinite blocks. I suggest you read our no personal attacks and assume good faith policies/guidelines while waiting for this block to expire. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 03:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As HighInBC explains, administrators deal with behavior, and don’t arbitrate content. Since you continue to display a combative stance toward everyone who crosses your path, I’ve extended the block to 72 hours. If this behavior persists, you may lose access to this page or be blocked indefinitely. Please reconsider your approach to interactions with other editors. Acroterion (talk) 03:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]