User talk:UlyssesFromIthaca

September 2017[edit]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Shooting of Scout Schultz. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Also note that use of singular they pronouns is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. Funcrunch (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DenniATL (talk • contribs) 15:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g. hebephilia), a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Funcrunch (talk) 15:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 15:52, 18 September 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Social Justice Warriors aren't humans, insulting them shouldn't be considered as bad as what I consider to be "insulting people" UlyssesFromIthaca (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Wikipedia policy draws no such distinctions. Unless you are willing to collaborate on an equal footing with all other editors, you may not edit here. —C.Fred (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

If Wikipedia is neutral, makes no distinction, is objective, etc.... and all the stuff WHY then do you tolerate use the objective use of pronouns that describe a subjective reality? If Obama says tomorrow "my pronouns are HeilHitler" then you will change all his wikipedia page with "heilhitler"? UlyssesFromIthaca (talk) 16:08, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This isn't an unblock request. As you are obviously just here to troll, I have revoked your talk page access. This leaves you with WP:UTRS. Yamla (talk) 16:09, 18 September 2017 (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.