User talk:Ohweshould
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop. Consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
No you shouldn't have
[edit]
You have been indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. Vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect, the information I added to Larry Silverstein's wiki is not blanking, addition of nonsense or random text, spam, misinformation, a privacy violation, a personal attack or a violation of your neutral point of view policy. The information is VERY pertinent to the topic and is 100% verifiable as fact.
If you would please explain specifically how this information is a violation of Wikipedia terms, that would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you and regards...
Ohweshould (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was blocked by ohnoitsjamie for Vandalism. The information I added to Larry Silverstein's wiki was pertinent to the topic, 100% verifiable as fact and in no way can it be seen as Vandalism. I emailed ohnoitsjamie requesting an explanation and so far he has not replied. Any help would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you very much for your time.
Decline reason:
I can't think of a reason that it would be helpful to add identical text to multiple articles, especially text that appears to be intended to make a point. We have enough users already pushing points of view on articles related to this topic; we don't need any more at this time. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:56, 12 September 2008 (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.
Ohweshould (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I admit I added identical text to multiple articles at first - this resulted in the request to stop, which I did. I was blocked when I re-posted information to just one article. It is not my intention to make a point, but to add pertinent information that is missing. If there is another way, such as by adding a section, that I can add this information please let me know and I will gladly comply. Thank you.
Decline reason:
AFAICT this is is a single-purpose account, of the kind we get every year on September 11, and good faith notwithstanding it doesn't look to me like you're in this to be a long-term contributor. — Daniel Case (talk) 03:18, 12 September 2008 (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.