User talk:'Selfless... Rep

Welcome!

Hello, 'Selfless... Rep, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!  Dougweller (talk) 08:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy.  You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 08:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't mean to be rude, but none of your edits met our criteria. One was promotional, added your business - it would need an article meeting our criteria at WP:ORG to be added there. The others were all original research, see WP:NOR. Dougweller (talk) 08:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Your reason here 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 18:08, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No new name chosen, no rebuttal of blocking rationale given. Peridon (talk) 20:23, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

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).

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Sincere apologies for not being efficient in this format/platform. However, the name change request is to remove the Rep portion and leave the title as is ('Selfless...) because it is who I am. This name is identified as an author, but also doubles as the conceptual essence for the truth of "Love." Consequently, there is no negative intentions given or felt because it is merely a misunderstanding of content. The edits provided are all valid and do appear in content that is published, copy-written, and under academic review before its global implementation begins. Therefore the freely visible info available on Facebook is linked as its supportive link because that is the location of the official homepage of both parent entity ('Eternal Optimism...) and its subsidiary ('Selfless... Inc.). The website link of www.selfless.biz contains all valid information that verifies legal existence and provides transparency of necessary registrations regarding the only U.S based Exempt Organization that facilitates an empowerment of surplus. If this response was incorrectly done in location, kindly accept my apologies and I will try to better understand the accurate way to respond. Selflessly, Ps. The edited information is all part of the 2012 discovery of logical "absolute truth" Human Nature pattern as 'Eternal Optimism... Philosophy precedes both science and religion because ultimately, it is merely a way of thought that has 2 types pragmatic or "absolute truth" (all other variations and divisions are only derivatives of the original two stated forms). But, the truth is evidenced in the following question, Is "causality" an empirically linked pattern of (complete) reciprocal valid events or (incomplete) linear theory that is subject to flaws?" 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As indicated above, this name is clearly a reference to the organization you promoted in your edits. Kinu ^t/_c 19:54, 15 May 2014 (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.

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).

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

The name change request is to remove the Rep portion and leave the title as is ('Selfless...) because it is who I am identified as an author in the academically commercial edition evidenced in the following. Amazon is used for the "Academically-Commercial" edition because of its global sale-delivery efficiency. "Truth" is absolute and transcends any temporal barriers always. Is your socio-cultural norms, religion/non-religious belief your chosen "scapegoat" or do you continually seek to get an understanding? (Key Fact) The “actuality” of the “revolving” pattern for the “Oxymoron Appreciation” purchase value, means that "E.O" is the only item that will provide continual revenue as a "consumer need" in "appreciation-value," unlike the mere "want” of gold by countries for economic Central Bank leverage. Selflessly, Ps. All links provided within the edits refer to Facebook notes that contain the same double entendre author name. Theories are subject to being disproven and flawed, but "E.O" is the valid discovery of the Human Nature pattern that is cyclical in nature/essence. After all, which subject was born out of which, philosophy out of religion/science or religion/science out of philosophy? 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 05:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

That is incomprehensible. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 09:59, 18 May 2014 (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.

.

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Incomprehensible means having or subject to no limits, and Jpgordon is correct in saying so about the essence of "selfless." However, I will clarify the request with more simplicity. I am requesting the name change to 'Selfless... because that is the author name for the published writings that were referenced. Additionally, 'Selfless... validly decoded and proves that "Love" is a dependent choice of free will that is built on "blind trust” or the independent constant variable "Hope." As a result, "When there is a positive correlation between two variables (“Hope” and “Love”), as the value of one variable increases (“Hope” 1st), the value of the other variable (“Love” 2nd) also increases..." Therefore, I ask kindly that my name is corrected as requested and my valid edits be applied accordingly, thank you. Selflessly, 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 15:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

you have already been told that the name "selfless" is not acceptable. If you wish to apply for a username change in order to be unblocked please do so without using flowery or allegorical language. Neither Jpgordon nor I are stupid, and neither of us have any idea as to what you are talking about. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 15:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Thank you for the reply, but there never was any alleged claims or implied references towards anyone being stupid on my behalf. However, what you are saying is that the legally valid author name of 'Selfless... is not an acceptable name? All names have a meaning within them, but are you allowed to discriminate against one for their name due to personal assumptions and beliefs? Furthermore, if you do not have an idea what I am talking about, you need to clarify what you specifically do not understand because the previous concerns were/are mere misinterpretations already addressed with valid evidence. Otherwise, there is no valid reason for the continued discrimination against the name change being requested for use. Selflessly, Ps. 'Selfless... Rep did have correlation to the Exempt Organization, but the name 'Selfless... is a legally published author recognized on a national platform with international applicability, but the difference seems to be "overlooked" due to "having no idea...?" (Kindly note: There is no negative tone associated with my reply, only a "matter of fact.") 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 20:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This has nothing to do with whether it's your 'legally published author name'. Whatever else it is 'Selfless' is clearly also linked to the name of the organisation, so we won't allow you to use it as a name. It's as simple as that, and no amount of discussion is likely to change anyone's mind. You don't have to agree with our username policy but you do have to abide by it if you want to edit - and that means picking a totally unrelated name. If you keep asking for the same name again, you are likely to have access to this talk page removed because constantly telling you 'no' is a waste of time. Olaf Davis (talk) 23:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

(Olaf Davis) Thank you for providing clarity of "your" reason, but the Wikipedia: Username policy clearly states such allowance of the following within the section titled "Usernames implying shared use": "However, usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person...,"[4] Therefore,the name does meet the requirements within this platform according to the clearly stipulated aforementioned policy. But if there is a misunderstanding of this policy's application, kindly inform me about it or permit the name change as requested? Selflessly, Ps. You clarified that it is a legitimate author name, but you make assumed association to the Exempt Organisation despite the edits not being of any promotional content. 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 16:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As you still won't accept that you are not going to be unblocked to use this name, and because you only seem to want to edit by adding what appears to be original research (WP:OR) which is contrary to our policies and is referenced only to an unacceptable source (Facebook), I am declining your request. I am leaving you one more chance to show us that you can fit in with our ways of working. You will need to choose an acceptable user name (WP:USERNAME), and you will need to convince us that you understand "reliable AND independent source" (WP:RS) and "no original research" (WP:OR. Remember that Wikipedia is not here to promote points of view, and that it is an encyclopaedia and not a place like Facebook where you are much freer to add what you want. This will fairly certainly be your last chance here, so think carefully before replying. Peridon (talk) 17:06, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

'Selfless Rep' suggests to me that it could be used by anyone at Selfless (like 'Secretary of the XY Foundation', given as an example of an unacceptable name) not that it's a specific individual. Even if you disagree, is the name really that important? If you're genuinely here to work on the encyclopaedia surely another name will suffice. Olaf Davis (talk) 22:32, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

'Selfless... Rep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Thank you for the ultimatum (Peridon), and it is suggested that you and all wikipedia admins pay careful attention to the following:

1. Wikipedia's username requirements are being disregarded despite the false, opinionated assumptions of the requested username correction as having to be associated with the E.O which, was kindly initiated by (Dougweller). But the ref platform of use is Facebook which is freely visible in parts to those without accounts, and it dually meets the copyright requirements to allow its global public view. 2. (Peridon and according admin)What does Wikipedia advocate within its platform, actual facts/truth or pragmatic opinions/preferences? (Peridon) states that my edits "appear to be original research which is contrary to Wikipedia policies," but what does Wikipedia truly pursue and purpose? The section that defines original research begins as follows: "Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist." However, that sentence answers both my previous and original third request for unblock because it means that Wikipedia ultimately advocates only for its chosen pragmatic opinions. The Wikipedia requirement sentence does not allow facts which are dictionary defined ultimately as a state of actuality/objective reality, but popularly known as "truth." Wikipedia has this contradictory statement as a requirement which, all of its admins abide by wholeheartedly as followers subject to a pragmatic, dictatorship entity of its own made rules. In "actuality," any fact/truth is absolute, and therefore it transcends any temporal barriers including time as an "absolute truth." (The empirically valid characteristic of "absolute truth" is best described as the oxymoron of "perfectly infinite;" unable to contradict itself despite the attempt to negate it.) 3. (Olaf Davis) repeats to making further false assumptions regarding the name by attributing it to the Exempt Organization versus my identity as an author? He then asks if "the name is important," as though any writer's pen name has no meaning associated with their choice of pen name? Apparently, his misunderstanding of Wikipedia's own username policy and my reply was simply evidenced of him incorrectly relating it to the Exempt Organization repeatedly. But, is the problem my pen name or what my Exempt Organization is responsible for causing globally? Wikipedia is a non-profit concerned about its reputation of reliability and authoritative ability to discern for validity, but then its own policy advocates discrimination to promote its "rightful choice" for inaccurate method of "encyclopaedia openness?!" Encyclopaedia summarized means a work that contains knowledge on all branches of information. However, based on our interaction thus far, Wikipedia wants to promote its own pragmatic agenda only, and per its requirements guidelines rejects the admission of facts. Wikipedia's required policy to reject facts/truth certainly only supports the public perception of its reputation as unreliable despite its improvements on executing authority. Therefore, you are welcome for the necessary edit to the Wikipedia "No Original research" policy as it will advocate for vast improvement of this "Non-Profit" entity's reputation, globally. (Kindly note that the only aspect with power to cause change is "absolute truth.") Selflessly,

Ps.(Peridon) was the second to review my rookie request for an unblock which contained no reason etc for reply due to not yet learning proper use of this platform and its features, but within the third/next reply the according apologies etc were not accepted due to false name associations? The third admin or (Kinu) ignored my valid identity as the author for false assumptions of organisation promotion? Now you know "what" I do and the cause of the "unintelligible" name choice so, kindly make the according changes or this matter will result in the accordingly necessary actions beginning with evidenced discrimination. 'Selfless... Rep (talk) 19:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As you clearly have no intention of abiding by our policies I am denying you further editing ability on this page.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:22, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

To point something out once again, Facebook is NOT a reliable independent source insofar as Wikipedia is concerned. Also, please see WP:TRUTH. Peridon (talk) 19:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)