User talk:TSAR1984

Welcome!

Hi TSAR1984! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Bridget (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Lena Raine, you may be blocked from editing. TotallyJimmyFallon (talk) 18:47, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Silver seren^C 18:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}.

Salvio

19:00, 18 December 2022 (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).

TSAR1984 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Edits were not disruptive and improved the factual accuracy of the articles in question. Additionally, they were not provocative in nature and were respectful to a large number of different viewpoints. TSAR1984 (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were clearly edit warring, and your unblock request does not acknowledge this. PhilKnight (talk) 19:33, 18 December 2022 (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 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).

TSAR1984 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Edits were designed solely to increase factual accuracy, clearly not with the intent to provoke. Edits were then reinstated when they were rejected despite being an improvement on factual accuracy. TSAR1984 (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

What you seem to be saying is that your edit warring was justified because your edits were correct- being correct is not a defense to edit warring, as every edit warrior thinks that their edits are correct. Note that you are blocked not specifically for edit warring, but the broader not here to build an encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 18 December 2022 (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 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).

TSAR1984 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Was previously unaware of what the term "wheel warring"/"edit warring" meant. Took a closer look at the guidelines. Edit warring will not be happening again. TSAR1984 (talk) 20:02, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You aren't going to be unblocked without a pretty broad WP:TOPICBAN here. Yamla (talk) 20:56, 18 December 2022 (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.

Let me be clear, the problem is not only that you were edit warring. That was a problem, yes, but there are bigger issues, as far as I'm concerned, since the reason you were edit warring was to remove all pronouns from the bio of a trans woman, with the spurious argument that you were making the article more factually accurate. You are still arguing that. The feeling is get is that you are engaged in a fair bit of transphobic trolling. That's why the block is for not being here to build an encyclopaedia.

Salvio

20:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Trolling" was not the intent of the aforementioned edits. The intent was to provide visitors of the page with more accurate information. Additionally, if the edits were intended as a personal attack, pronouns would have been replaced with "he/him", let it be known that another user attempted this in the past. Said attempt was promptly stricken down by moderators. In review, I have thought of a better way to provide visitors of the page with more accurate information that is better than my previous attempt.

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).

TSAR1984 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Following a re-reading of the rules, acknowledgment of them, and identifying where rules were broken, a ban is no longer appropriate or necessary. TSAR1984 (talk) 21:04, 18 December 2022 (UTC) [reply]

Decline reason:

Per below. As this was your fourth request and it doesn't look like we're going to get anywhere, I am revoking your talk page access. You will still be able to request unblock but you will have to do it privately through UTRS. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:22, 20 December 2022 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Daniel Case (talk) 07:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Can you be more specific as to what rules you broke? And where (like, diffs). Daniel Case (talk) 07:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the rule that was broken: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators#Wheel_war

Nope. --Yamla (talk) 11:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You also haven't suggested a WP:TOPICBAN for yourself, despite me pointing out there's essentially no chance you'll be unblocked without one. --Yamla (talk) 11:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A general topic ban is beyond the scope of what is necessary or appropriate. I have the intent to make a different edit on an article I edited previously, but I have learned that constantly reverting it when moderators remove my edit is an unacceptable course of action and I will not be repeating it. I genuinely believe that the next edit I do will not be seen as disruptive this time. TSAR1984 (talk) 11:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think there's no reasonable chance you'll be unblocked without one and you've already had three declined unblock requests. But, your call. You are free to take this approach. --Yamla (talk) 11:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]