User talk:2010F11

2010F11, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi 2010F11! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021[edit]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.Jingiby (talk) 05:29, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use your sandbox. Super Ψ Dro 08:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Super Ψ Dro 20:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wallachia. MelanieN (talk) 22:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You keep adding a second flag to the article Wallachia. At the talk page, two people say not to have it in the article and only you want to add it. Content disputes at Wikipedia are settled by discussion and consensus; the current consensus is not to include it. Yet you have re-added it at least 6 times since that discussion. This is edit warring and it is disruptive. This is your final warning: stop edit warring. Stop adding material that is against consensus. You can continue to discuss it at the talk page, but you need to give reasons - and don’t SHOUT. MelanieN (talk) 22:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not vandalizing!!! I’m just adding something useful!!! 😡😡😡 2010F11 (talk) 06:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know that's what you think. But other people disagree with you. Wikipedia works by consensus, and current consensus is not to include this flag. So you need to stop adding it. Instead, find helpful things to do at other articles. -- MelanieN (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2021 (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).

2010F11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I wasn’t vandalizing and it was a good choice to add that flag, but this editors (ex.Superdromaeosaurus) keep deleting my good edits!!!! Please, I beg you, unblock me!!!!!!

Decline reason:

You are accused of violating WP:EW but haven't addressed that in your unblock request. Yamla (talk) 18:36, 10 July 2021 (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).

2010F11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Okay, I quit! I will no longer violate WP:EW, I promise!!! Please unblock me!!!! [insert puppy eyes]

Decline reason:

I don't think you're mature enough to edit Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2021 (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.

P. S.: Ignore the last part!!! 2010F11 (talk) 18:41, 10 July 2021 (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).

2010F11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I’ll promise that I will add things when needed, like in the Iberian Union page!

Decline reason:

The relevant concern is your ability not to add something when it's time to sit back and discuss. Your actions, coupled with your appeals above, suggest that as soon as things turned tense you would be unable to prevent yourself from falling back into edit warring Nosebagbear (talk) 12:50, 12 July 2021 (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).

2010F11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please! I promise that I would never do that again! And sorry for what I did! Thank you for reading this message! 👍

Decline reason:

Nope. In particular, editing as an IP and then supporting your logged in edits pretending to be someone else is utterly loathsome behavior. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 13:47, 12 July 2021 (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.

2010F11 (talk) 13:24, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was just joking and mad at the same time! But I apologize! I will never do that again! From now on, I will no longer do this! I promise! 👍 2010F11 (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2021 (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).

2010F11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was just joking and mad at the same time! But I apologize! I will never do that again! From now on, I will no longer do this! I promise! 👍 2010F11 (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As these requests have been unproductive, I am declining this request and removing talk page access to prevent more time wasting for all. After you have matured as a person, can demonstrate that you will take this seriously, tell what you did wrong, and can describe what edits you wish to make, you may use WP:UTRS for further appeals. My suggestion is that you not make one right away. 331dot (talk) 19:50, 12 July 2021 (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.

UTRS 46321[edit]

UTRS appeal #46321 is now open. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And now it's closed. That's five or ten minutes I won't get back. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bleeding open book test, for Chrissake. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS 46603[edit]

UTRS appeal #46603 is now open. Pro forma notice to blocking admins, @ToBeFree and 331dot:. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS 46603 has been closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

email[edit]

For transparency reasons, I do not respond to emails about unblocking. Once your UTRS ban expires, you can request unblocking then via UTRS. You can seek further advice via IRC-- https://web.libera.chat/?channel=#wikipedia-en-unblock . --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I received your email; I'm not sure why you do not contact that person directly. However, the only thing you should be doing while blocked is working to get unblocked. You may use WP:UTRS to make an unblock request. 331dot (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will turn off your email access if you email me again about this matter. You are already aware of how to proceed. 331dot (talk) 06:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Now they've harassed me via email from Commons (where they are blocked). I muted them there too. Seeing your note, I thought I'd let you now. Basically, I don't need lectures from blocked users. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:56, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Email access withdrawn. 331dot (talk) 07:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ticket:2021102810001718 Cabayi (talk) 10:01, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi: Eh? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:11, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]