User talk:14.132.3.250

I have checked a large number of your edits, and repeatedly I saw edit summaries claiming that you were removing what you call "selling" Markus Lösch, but where the actual edit appeared to do nothing of the kind. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:39, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you know him. However this page is not about him, there is not reason to mention him MORE times than the founder and not mention ANY of the other schools that EXIST in Japan. Previously, the entry that stated "few remaining schools that does paired (sotai) kata with shinken" is entirely his school's advertising blurb and what he is selling at his dojo, based on an demonstration he did in Europe with shinken (which is viewable online.) Now that is entered in on the page. Not suspicious at all? This Wikipedia article is NOT an accurate representation of the school and it is designed to sell him and get students for him by promoting his sales pitches. There is also no mention of the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai and the Hokushin Itto ryu line that is included there, nor the teacher, nor the other lines in Japan. There is a bias and this is clearly being used to sell him (Markus) as the last practicing school, which is untrue and is in line with his sales pitches that he gives in Europe and in various social media platforms. Wholly inappropriate and repeated behavior of his online. This is not a format or platform for promoting Markus Losch, his fake change of citizenship (which does not exist in Japan, he is not a Japanese citizen; he changed his name overseas) and a slew of other misleading trash. He can start his own article and promote himself. Keep it out of here. It is a disservice. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 15:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to the page giving links to the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai (National Japanese Budo Association) are being removed and replaced on the Hokushin Itto Ryu page just as I said they would be previously. The Article's image cannot even be changed without their permission. There is obviously editing bias going on here, he biased party is claiming that it has to be someone other than them and they are reacting by calling any and all edits vandalism.

14.132.3.250 (talk) 08:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the recent edit. I think we improved the article a lot. Like it is now, both lines get the credit they deserve and nobody should be unhappy as it is nutral and cannot be misunderstood. This is what I love about Wikipedia, sometimes even editing wars can lead to something positive and improve the article in the end. I hope you understand that things like "exchanges were made" or going too much into the 5th Soke who didn't practice, can be misunderstood very easy. And Wikipedia shouldn't be like this. I now am sure that it was never your intention to do so. I am sorry if I sounded a bit harsh towards you. In the end we just wanted the same. That the article is informative and nutral, giving credits to both lines. Best regards Jellyfish82 (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Jellyfish82 You are a member of Markus Losch’s grouo; perhaps Martin Sterling or Markus himself. If you are going to edit the page stop, lying, hiding behind a user account and be honest with who you are. Your edits are the ones biased and you have a vested interest in Markus Losch while claiming otherwise, you have continuously false flagged me and my edits as vandalism in order to control content for the page with is neither honest, factual or unbiased. Now claims are being made that the name is copyrighted, which in a quick search of EU records turns out to be true. You and your group have equivocally copyrighted a historic name and attempted to control and warp the truth. Be honest. Stop hiding. Tell the truth. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

—�— JamesBWatson Can you explain to me why all the edits that disagree with Markus’ websites, or contain images and information that are not his on the current page, or are done without the approval of his students are deemed and reported “vandalism”? Because I can...and it was raised in the page discussion: copyright. Of a historic name for a private entity.

What I am saying is going on -is absolutely- going on:

Please see:

http://trademark.markify.com/trademarks/ctm/hokushin+itto-ryu+hyoho/014755649/?lang=cs

14.132.3.250 (talk) 04:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No I can't, because I didn't do any of it, and I have no more insight than you into the minds of other editors. In fact I don't even know whether that has happened or not, let alone why if it has. I also wonder why you ask me: I have never edited the article in question, nor have I ever had anything to do with it, so far as I recall, except for pointing out to you that some of your edit summaries were misleading. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JamesBWatson Can you explain how they were misleading? I do not believe they were, you just feel they were. So you have the power to enforce your feelings. However, what I say stands and is logical. There is NOTHING misleading about anything I am doing. Can you explain one example of me being misleading or is it a case of you not understanding?

14.132.3.250 (talk) 14:18, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since you ask, yes, here is one example. The edit summary here gave me the impression, and I think it would give anyone the impression, that the edit was removing use of Wikipedia to "sell" Markus Losch, whatever that means, whereas in fact it did nothing other than attempting to add a link to an article about him. (Incidentally, the article didn't exist, but that is another point altogether.) Also I have n idea what you mean by saying that I "have the power to enforce [my] feelings". All I did was mention to you the misleading edit summaries, in the hope that you would then be careful to avoid making similar mistakes in future. I don't see how you think that is "enforcing" anything. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hokushin Ittō-ryū. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Bakilas (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Bakilas I am going to remove this Warning. I saw the original. Please respond or at least tell me you understand that I am aware of the situation and attempting to remedy it. Apparently I am not allowed to edit the page without being labeled a vandal, which is a straw man argument. Please look at the page talk.[reply]

I appreciate that you are aware of the situation and I am glad to see that you are both engaging on the talk page, I am just trying to prevent this from escalating to the point where anyone gets blocked. Bakilas (talk) 05:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017[edit]

Your recent editing history at Hokushin Ittō-ryū 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.
Your edit war with Jellyfish82 has resumed. Do not make further edits to Hokushin Ittō-ryū without arriving at a consensus. I'd suggest both users request assistance a third opinion or seek dispute resolution. Operator873^CONNECT 04:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Operator873 This is a straw man argument and an attempt to keep me from editing the Hokushin Itto Ryu page. Pure and simple. I am the third party here. I am NOT selling anything and my edits would be completely reasonable anywhere else. I am not allowed to edit the page, my edits are "reviewed" and accepted by Jellyfish82 who is apparently deemed himself moderator of the Hokushin Itto ryu page, and anyone that changes information he quickly labels as a vandal and then edits immediately, ensuing an edit war.

When he is forced to accept he is dominating the edits, in a biased manner and give in,  then he changes, then re-edits and rewords them in poor English to suit himself. If you attempt to correct them, even on the talk page, he denies everything and turns you in.

It’s Insane, and aren't the false flag attempts a hint at what is going on? Pay attention.

Every time this happens, the same claims are made. Against me. As you can see from this page, SEVERAL times by me under the same account without hiding or lying. Then I make an account, and then the EXACT SAME THING HAPPENS; then THIS IP IS BLOCKED as it was deemed a "sock puppet" after numerous requests were made for me to make an account because of the alleged "beneifits" (hiding), which hides my IP and locction, and the creation of an account itself is ACTUALLY a sock puppet under your own "rules". Logic needs to fall in place and you all need to pay attention, or hand this over to someone that can keep up.

14.132.3.250 (talk) 08:50, 23 October 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).

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

Request reason:

Merely editing, accused of edit war after discussions and rules used as a straw man to block me. The people claiming I am “vandalizing” a Wikipedia article are in fact using the page to sell the legitimacy of a martial art school that historic precedence in name and history, but the person (Markus Losch, who changed his name to Japanese overseas) has copyrighted the name and claims that it is his legal right. The rules are being bent to block me. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 23:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This IP address is not blocked directly. If you are unable to edit, please follow the instructions which appear when you attempt to do so. Yamla (talk) 00:50, 24 October 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.

[User:Yamla|Yamla]] I am completely unable to edit any pages, log into my account on my main consol, and my attempt to request a new password is blocked. I received the following message in an email: “Many thanks for your interest in joining Wikipedia. Unfortunately we are unable to process your request because you have been blocked from editing the English Wikipedia. There are steps you can take in order to appeal your block and be able to edit. Before you take these steps please read the guide to appealing blocks”

I tried the ticket system request, it denies me telling me I am blocked.

So you are telling me that is procedure to block me from editing -anything- in English on the site, logging in and to keep me from appealing? Or request an account or anything but edit my own page....

But my IP is not blocked, correct?

Which one is correct? What am I missing?

14.132.3.250 (talk) 03:43, 24 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I am blocked from editing anything in English or logging into my account in my main consol. I am not the one initiating an edit war. I am the one talking on the page, having my edits undone without any discussion, my discussion being ignored, and then after personal attacks the “claiments” accuse me of being a vandal by submitting updates pictures and relative information.

The system is being misused and you are allowing it.

Decline reason:

Your block has expired. PhilKnight (talk) 23:16, 25 October 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.

For the reviewers: Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/日本古武道. Alex Shih (talk) 05:20, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify what you mean when you say that you can't log in on your "main consol"? Wikipedia has no facility for blocking an editor from logging into an account, only to block him or her from editing. Stewards at meta.wikimedia.org can globally lock accounts, which prevents logging in, but I have checked your account and it is not locked. Are you sure that you are unable to log in, not just unable to edit once you have logged in? You should be able to log in and edit the talk page of your account, but nowhere else. What is your "main consol"? Is that a computer or other device that you use to edit from? If so is the problem due to some setting there? If you really can't log in to your account then I suggest you post here a copy of the full text of the message you get when you try to log in, telling you that you can't. That may help us to work out what the problem is. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One more thought. I see that you say refer to an attempt to request a new password. Does that mean you have forgotten your password? If so that explains why you can't log in. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JamesBWatson My IP is blocked. That means that when I try to log on it tells me my IP is blocked and will not allow me. Have someone block your IP and see how that works out for you when you try to log on.

14.132.3.250 (talk) 14:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how doing that would help me to understand what you mean by saying that you are "logging into [your] account in [your] main consol", and until I understand that there is no way that I can help to overcome that problem. I can't solve a problem unless I know what the problem is. I also see that this IP address is not blocked, and that you have even used it recently to edit. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:21, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JamesBWatsonYeah sure. See how I was blocked for no apparent reason below? See that? Just look below here...I can't log in because I am blocked for editing, because I am not using an account, which is a puppet, and my IP is visible. So I'm unable to log in. So there is no way to log in because my account is blocked.... So I cannot log in because my IP is blocked. Again...I cannot log in because my IP IS BLOCKED. Because my IP is blocked, I am unable to log in. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is not true that you can't log into your account because your IP address is blocked, as the block on your IP address only prevents editing, not logging in. If there is some other reason why you can't log in then please re-read the message above which I took the trouble to write in an attempt to help you clarify the reason, so that we could deal with it. I suggest you make some attempt to answer one or more of the questions I asked there, particularly "If you really can't log in to your account then I suggest you post here a copy of the full text of the message you get when you try to log in, telling you that you can't. That may help us to work out what the problem is." We can't solve the problem if we don't know what it is. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JamesBWatson Ok, I am not sure how many questions you think you asked above....so I will answer all three of them:

"Can you clarify what you mean when you say that you can't log in on your "main consol"?"

My main computer interface at my location.

"What is your "main consol"?"

My primary computer.

"Does that mean you have forgotten your password?"

No. It means it would not let me log in because my account was blocked. It was giving me an error. And Wikipedia does have the ability to block account logins using VPNs if they are "common." Yep. I also use them at work and encrypt data on my computer. That is not your business of course, but you insist that I have to answer your three questions and think deeply about them. I did, nothing really to think about. So it changes nothing.

14.132.3.250 (talk) 17:13, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I shall make just one more attempt to help you, which you can take up if you wish to

Evidently you can access Wikipedia from this IP address (14.132.3.250). Your account is blocked from editing, but not from logging in. You can therefore log into your account from this IP address, irrespective of whether you can from your VPN or not.

When I said that Wikipedia has no facility for blocking an editor from logging into an account but that Stewards at meta.wikimedia.org can globally lock accounts I should have been more careful to make the distinction clear. The Wikimedia Foundation has various parts, of which the English language Wikipedia is the best known. Another is meta wiki, which serves some overall management functions for all of the projects, including English Wikipedia Administrators on English Wikipedia have no ability to prevent anyone from logging into their account, but stewards on meta do. The method that is used on meta to prevent logging in is referred to as "locking", as distinct from "blocking", which prevents editing but not logging in. Your account and this IP address (14.132.3.250) are both subject to blocks on editing English Wikipedia, but neither of them is subject to locks (and indeed locks can't be applied to IP addresses, but are only available on accounts).

There is one other method of preventing editing. IP addresses that are used by Tor exit nodes are automatically prevented from editing by software, without intervention of any administrator or steward. However, even that stops only editing, not logging in. None of the documentation relating to blocking accounts or IP addresses, locking accounts, open proxies and VPNs indicates that there is anything other than global locking which prevents logging into an account, nor does anything else that I have ever come across in over seven years as an administrator. If, however, there is something which I have never heard of but which is preventing you from logging into your account from this IP address then for a third and final time I suggest that you post the text of the message telling you that you can't log in, since, as I have repeatedly pointed out to you, we can't solve a problem unless we know what the problem is.

Finally, please don't put words into my mouth. I did not say that you had to answer three questions, nor that you had to think deeply about anything. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This IP address has been blocked from editing, because it has been used by an editor evading a block on an account. As long as your account is blocked, permission to edit has been withdrawn, and until that permission is restored you must not edit. If you believe there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to the talk page of your account, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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).

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

Request reason:

I am actually exposed by not using an account. There is really NO reason to block me. I am not EVADING anything and there is no reason as to why my account was blocked in the first place, other than someone disagreed with my edits and decided I was vandalizing (go ahead and show me proof that I am vandalizing anything. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 16:13, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are not allowed to edit logged out when your account is blocked. You need to request unblock at your account, not here. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:28, 30 October 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.

Yamla Wanna tell me when I was blocked again? Just to be clear I have tagged you. Look up there sport!16:28, 30 October 2017 14.132.3.250 (talk) 18:12, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked on 2017-10-22T23:02:44, as shown here. Note the exact date and time will depend on your timezone. This IP address was additionally blocked on 2017-10-30T09:31:43, as shown here. While either of those blocks are in place, you are not allowed to edit. --Yamla (talk) 18:52, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla Oh I see. So my account 日本古武道 was suspected of being a sock puppet to gain some sort of advantage (which is unclear as of yet), and was WP:SOFTBLOCK on October 26th without me being aware of it, as I do most of my editing from my IP. SO when I edited the Hokushin Ittō-ryū talk page today, JamesBWatson thought it would be a good idea to block this IP. So technically I have two blocks on my account that must be unraveled because I am doing something against the rules and I am being punished, is that correct? One my IP, and one on my 日本古武道 account? Are there any more blocks that I am not aware of? Incidentally, you can see that I am now aware of my 日本古武道 block and dealing with it. Should I deal with this block here? Is it worth my time because clearly you don't want me editing Wikipedia, is that correct? @Boing! said Zebedee : I take it that both my IP and my 日本古武道 account are blocked for entirely different reasons, or the same reason? Should I appeal both of these: All in one place? How is that going to work? 14.132.3.250 (talk) 02:31, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.