User talk:115.42.13.190

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:115.42.13.190 reported by User:Leftregister (Result: ). Thank you. Leftregister (talk) 05:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

January 2024

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  EvergreenFir (talk) 06:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

My edits have been constructive and well explained. I questioned and challenged the inclusion of a flag in the article on the New South Wales Police Force, claimed to be an official flag of the NSW Police and sought a reference to support the suggested official status of the flag. No reference was provided in quite some time. Later, after no reference had been cited to support the status of the flag, I moved the image within the article and referred to it as merely as having been used rather than being official. My edit remained unchanged for quite some time through numerous edits to the article and had become the "status quo". User Leftregister then restored the flag to the information box without citing a reference to support it and, initially without any valid explanation for their change. As some time had passed since my initial challenge about the flag, I clarified the challenge about its status. Leftregister ignored the challenge and restored the flag. Leftregister engaged in inane argument, in the double negative, that there was no cited source to prove the flag is not official. I again clarified the challenge. Leftregister again restored the flag without reference and without any valid reason and was repeatedly personal in their comments in their edit summaries. Leftregister trolled my edits on other articles and reverted them. I provided more details, quotes and a reference about the NSW Police flag but, despite providing a reference, Leftregister again reverted my edit. Leftregister also reverted ALL my recent edits on other material in the article and did not limit their edit to disputed material. Leftregister again trolled my edits on other articles and reverted ALL of them without valid reason. In all, my edits have been reasonable, constructive, explained and referenced.115.42.13.190 (talk) 6:55 pm, Yesterday (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. You have not adequately addressed the reason for your block.

Please see our policy on edit warring. In the event of a content dispute, editors are required to stop reverting, discuss, and seek consensus among editors on the relevant talk page. If discussions reach an impasse, editors can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution.

Points to ponder:

Edit warring is wrong even if one is right.

Any arguments in favor of one's preferred version should be made on the relevant talk page and not in an unblock appeal.

Calling attention to the faults of others is never a successful strategy; one must address one's own behavior.

To be unblocked, you must affirm an understanding of all of this, and what not to do, and what to do when in a content dispute. Please tell us, in your own words, what it all means. Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:13, 22 January 2024 (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.

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:115.42.13.190 reported by User:Leftregister (Result: ). Thank you. Leftregister (talk) 00:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as done at New South Wales Police Force.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Aoidh (talk) 03:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

---