User talk:Upaqeswaq1
August 2021
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 14:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)I'm unblocking you hoping that your email request reflects what you plan for your future editing. Your changes changed the titles of sources, misrepresented what the sources actually said, broke links to other articles, etc. It was the Calvinist/Reformed changes that were the main problems. If you are going to change links, always preview before you save. Doug Weller talk 15:22, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
You need to discuss any major changes on article talk pages
[edit]And they need to be backed by reliable sources. Your own knowledge doesn't count here,see WP:NOR. Please communicate with me here, see Help:Fixing failed pings. Doug Weller talk 18:07, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Please remember to login
[edit]
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. JimRenge (talk) 22:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 4
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western Christian High School (Hull, Iowa), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian Reformed Church. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
September 2021
[edit]{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ... discospinster talk 19:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Upaqeswaq1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
pls read msg]Hello, this is Upaqeswaq1; I'm directing this message to @Discospinster: on my own talk page As you're probably aware, this is my second block since I opened the account; I was granted back access on the condition that I be wary of making so-called "disruptive edits" and to double-check on the info provided which I've honoured to this day bcoz last time I was very quick to change anything without due to overexcitement I'm sure the administrators are merely doing their job and are in no way out to get me but pls hear from my end on why I feel the current block is unjustified: Here's something bout me: personally irreligious and studies Comparative Religions; I've no ulterior motive and am strongly non-partisan But I see a lot of misleading pages and articles on religion in Wikipedia which seem strongly biased e.g. in one of my now-reverted contributions, Category:Christian schools in Iowa, you'll notice that there are only Protestant schools on this list and none from the Catholic or the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox faiths, yet the page's title's still "Christian schools" rather than "Protestant schools" (one example of an innocent but misleading article) Not to mention the numerous times I've noticed the term "Christian" almost exclusively identified with individual Protestants' personal biographies as well as Protestant-based institutions in North America or when the term "Reformed" seemed unique to the Calvinist tradition when it's actually a broader term that in many cases also contains the Wesleyan-Arminian tradition (which is why I've been replacing the two terms at times when necessary) These are just a few examples I've cited to make my point
Pls understand that it was never my intention to cause nuisance to or even edit-warring with the Wiki community, I only wished to balance the output that the platform should project which is 'true, neutral and unbiased data'; been a big fan of your site for years and truly believe it's of utmost importance to present candid facts at least here, at a time when misinformation is booming all over the Internet However, if that's indeed how I appeared, I'm sorry and wish to be more creative, productive and less disruptive in my future editing campaign Having said all that, I humbly request that you revoke my block and also to pls analyse and reinstate my previous contributions; I've put a lot of effort into them, ensuring minimal misrepresentation or disruption If you acknowledge my request, forward me your list of guidelines so I can work around and not mess with any peer-reviewed (and approved) publications and citations
Thank you Upaqeswaq1 (talk) 22:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You seem to be basing your edits on your personal views and not on what independent reliable sources state. This request does not convince me that you understand how to properly work towards the changes you want to see, or that you understand the need for independent reliable sources to support your ideas. As such, I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2021 (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.
Pls respond as soon as you can Thank you Upaqeswaq1 (talk) 13:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)