User talk:Realityvstruth

Welcome

Hello, Realityvstruth, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- PBS (talk) 23:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However

To date you have made three edits:

20:44, 24 February 2012 (diff) Armenian Genocide denial ‎ (Tag: references removed)
19:26, 25 February 2012 (diff) Armenian Genocide denial ‎ (Tag: references removed)
22:58, 25 February 2012 (diff) Armenian Genocide denial ‎ (This is a counterargument page for the genocide claim, and should therefore contain the arguments of scholars who deny the genocide. Editors should use the "Armenian Genocide" page for information that support the genocide.) (Tag: references removed)

This shows a familiarity with Wikipedia editing over and above the usual. As it is in a controversial area full disclosure is important, what other user names (including IP addresses) if any have you used in the past to edit any of the Armenian Genocide articles?

If you are a new user then see The three-revert rule and Sock puppetry -- PBS (talk) 23:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Your recent editing history at Armenian Genocide denial shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

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. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 02:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Genocide denial

I have protected the page Armenian Genocide denial for four days. I expect responsible editors to discuss their differences on the talk page of the article and try in good faith to reach an agreement. --PBS (talk) 21:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Drmies (talk) 02:41, 12 March 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

I do not understand the reason for the block. I am trying to add legitimate information to the Armenian Genocide denial page about the reasons behind the fact that there are scholars out there that claim this event cannot be justified as a genocide. I have added nothing but legitimate sources, but just because it goes against the general atmosphere of this page, which is to preemptively disregard the counterarguments as an absurd denial of truth, editors keep deleting my information. Nocturnal781's last reason for deleting my information was : "That is a minority view, that is not accepted among many scholars." Not accepted by 'many' scholars? How subjective is that? There are significantly many historians who do claim that this is NOT a genocide, and this view deserves every right to be defended on this 'denial' page. This event isn't even officially acknowledged by the United States of America, but an editor can delete my information because 'it isn't accepted by many scholars'. That is clearly an imposition of personal opinions. I am hoping you see how absurd this is. This is the denial page, and it is absolutely ridiculous that legitimate information relating to why there is such a denial is not allowed on this page. I provided historical facts and put references about the events that led up to the topic of discussion, which is acknowledged by every sane historian out there (the argument is about what happened after these events), but editors delete this information or claim that I need to mention in the text the name of the historian who states these facts. This is like expecting someone to mention the name of the historian who says that the American Revolution was fought against the British Empire. I am quoting a historian who is regarded as one of the leading experts on this matter, but it is not being allowed on the page because it does not support the notion that 'the denial is absurd'. I am completely offended that there is such a bias of information on Wikipedia. Even though I am struggling to provide facts and the statements of leading historians about the very topic of the page - Armenian Genocide DENIAL - I am getting blocked. I would very much appreciate it if those who are insisting on censoring information that don't meet their own personal opinions get blocked, not me

Decline reason:

Arguing your position in an edit war using an unblock template to appeal a block for edit warring clearly illustrates your original statement (I do not understand the reason for the block.) Please read the links in the warning you received for edit warring and the block message you received for edit warring. Make sure you understand these principles before posting a future request for unblock (see WP:GAB) Tiderolls 01:34, 13 March 2012 (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.

I will watchlist this page in the event you have any questions. Tiderolls 01:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Your recent editing history at Armenian Genocide denial shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

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. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. After your recent one-week block I would have thought that you learned not to edit-war, but unfortunately you started again. Before I file a report at WP:3RRN could you try and discuss the edit you have been trying to add to the lead for the past few months? At this point you have no consensus to add this edit to the article. So please go to the talkpage of the article and try to gather consensus before you add this information into the article. Thank you Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Armenian Genocide denial, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Armenian Genocide denial 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.

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. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You must realise that *independent* analysis is required of these primary documents. Please cite a secondary source not primary documents and stop edit-warring. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:32, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Armenian Genocide denial, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]