User talk:Word0151
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]
- Hi Word0151! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 13:53, Saturday, March 25, 2023 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Word0151 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The indefinite block doesn't make sense. I wrongly decided to revert the edits in some pages without prior discussion, which though damnable, i think i have endured enough punishment and should be unblocked now. Those reverts don't make all of my edits, and i have made some good edits to pages like Sansho the Bailiff, Hindi etc. I can assure you that since i have let my non-civil and edit-waring behaviour, i won't prove to be obstructive and can make some constructive edits.
Decline reason:
You seem to have been reverting a lot including on the Hindi article you mention. In your next unblock request you should say what constructive edits you want to make. PhilKnight (talk) 17:57, 22 April 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.
Word0151 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=First the edits i would like to make after unblock- [[Dingal]] is whole lotta nonsense(i can't even verify the citations), Adding more information in [[Sergey Nechayev]] particularly from [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/article/nechaevshchina-an-unknown-chapter/F01C74F4F6B94CDA530D62400DE76C4C [1]], In articles of Tchaikovsky' Symphonies the section name should be changed from Criticism to Reception, non-existent film articles like Oyuki the Virgin, an article on musical instrument Turahi, adding photograph of [[Lawrence Bishnoi]] and [[M. Jaishankar]]. I won't try to make any contentious edits against current scholarly view or the non-disputable general consensus of editors, as i realize this causes unnecessary waste of everyone's time. And my reverts on [[Hindi]] were neither bad edits, you can check the talk page, and after an administrator told me not to revert i stopped and first discussed about the edits. I have also created two articles on rarities: [[Lala Ram Saran Das Talwar]], [[Jagat Singh Binjal]]. I also edit on English Wiktionary where i was blocked for a week for vandalizing pages, they didn't blocked me indefinitely because i was useful to the project(i created the entry [[wiktionary:किरच|किरच]] which was a ''featured word the day''). I think i deserve a second chance. |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=First the edits i would like to make after unblock- [[Dingal]] is whole lotta nonsense(i can't even verify the citations), Adding more information in [[Sergey Nechayev]] particularly from [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/article/nechaevshchina-an-unknown-chapter/F01C74F4F6B94CDA530D62400DE76C4C [1]], In articles of Tchaikovsky' Symphonies the section name should be changed from Criticism to Reception, non-existent film articles like Oyuki the Virgin, an article on musical instrument Turahi, adding photograph of [[Lawrence Bishnoi]] and [[M. Jaishankar]]. I won't try to make any contentious edits against current scholarly view or the non-disputable general consensus of editors, as i realize this causes unnecessary waste of everyone's time. And my reverts on [[Hindi]] were neither bad edits, you can check the talk page, and after an administrator told me not to revert i stopped and first discussed about the edits. I have also created two articles on rarities: [[Lala Ram Saran Das Talwar]], [[Jagat Singh Binjal]]. I also edit on English Wiktionary where i was blocked for a week for vandalizing pages, they didn't blocked me indefinitely because i was useful to the project(i created the entry [[wiktionary:किरच|किरच]] which was a ''featured word the day''). I think i deserve a second chance. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=First the edits i would like to make after unblock- [[Dingal]] is whole lotta nonsense(i can't even verify the citations), Adding more information in [[Sergey Nechayev]] particularly from [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/article/nechaevshchina-an-unknown-chapter/F01C74F4F6B94CDA530D62400DE76C4C [1]], In articles of Tchaikovsky' Symphonies the section name should be changed from Criticism to Reception, non-existent film articles like Oyuki the Virgin, an article on musical instrument Turahi, adding photograph of [[Lawrence Bishnoi]] and [[M. Jaishankar]]. I won't try to make any contentious edits against current scholarly view or the non-disputable general consensus of editors, as i realize this causes unnecessary waste of everyone's time. And my reverts on [[Hindi]] were neither bad edits, you can check the talk page, and after an administrator told me not to revert i stopped and first discussed about the edits. I have also created two articles on rarities: [[Lala Ram Saran Das Talwar]], [[Jagat Singh Binjal]]. I also edit on English Wiktionary where i was blocked for a week for vandalizing pages, they didn't blocked me indefinitely because i was useful to the project(i created the entry [[wiktionary:किरच|किरच]] which was a ''featured word the day''). I think i deserve a second chance. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
@PhilKnight @ToBeFree Can you please review my unblock request. Sorry if it feels importuning. Word0151 (talk) 05:51, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not interested in unblocking a user whose edit warring in multiple articles seems to indicate incompatibility with WP:CHILDPROTECT. Blocking you for edit warring was just the easiest way to deal with the problem. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: Such accusations are really outrageous, if only you could write constructively where i was pushing any such agenda. I can give me reasons:
The schrondinger article was too biased relying on those third grade news articles and making him seen as some evil. Will you ban that user too for making this edit
In the pederasty, i wanted it to be historically based( Nietzsche says in aphorism 101 of his human all to human book - Care must be taken, in the contemplation of earlier ages, that there be no falling into unjust scornfulness). I was not removing the modern view, it is just more than half of the articles's beginning focused excessively on that only!.
I also made similar edits on Whiplash article(which doesn't include any children), now do you think i had any malicious motives? I had been making similar edits without any kind of political agenda, it is just i dislike morals. And i have already said i will no longer edit on those articles, many editors(including me and User:Equinox) don't agree with the transgender stuff on wikipedia so will you block them indefinitely. Definitely NO, it is just that we won't edit on those articles. Word0151 (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- You "dislike morals"? And "don't agree with the transgender stuff on wikipedia"? I think those statements suggest you're going to bulldoze past Wikipedia MOS and policy the moment you're unblocked. Doesn't sound very persuasive for unblocking you.
- Also, as the editor you edit warred with on Whiplash (2014 film), your motive was not quite malicious but was highly disruptive. You were trying to change descriptive words of morality to different ones that were totally incorrect, and then claiming it was "more neutral". GraziePrego (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- @GraziePrego: I was just being wastefully pedantic before, and realize that it was kinda accurate as it also took into account perspective of both the victim and third-persons. I was wrongfully trying to push certain perspective. Also sorry for that irrelevant transgender thing i wrote, what i agree with doesn't matter(for example- i might not agree with certain culture or religion but that is only a preference, it is not that i dislike the persons who belong to it!). I agree to act in harmony with the Wikipedian policy, also those subjects are not really my field of interest, so i won't prove to be obstructive. I will just make non-controversial edits like this and will comply with the general consensus. Word0151 (talk) 13:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)