User talk:68.160.217.181

February 2024[edit]

Hello, I'm MaterialsPsych. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, Amy Klobuchar, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MaterialsPsych (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Amy Klobuchar, you may be blocked from editing. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:14, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not MaterialsPsych. I reverted you these two times. Your text is completely unacceptable. Engage in discussion on the talk page or I will block you. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made my edits based on reliable news articles and included the sources in my updates. I am open to discussing this on the talk page, but I don't understand why my text is deemed 'completely unacceptable.' I'd appreciate specific feedback on what you believe is wrong with my edits. Threatening to block me doesn't seem to be a constructive approach to improving this article. 68.160.217.181 (talk) 03:26, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Muboshgu,

I am writing to express my deep concern over the recent blocking of my account. I believe that my edits were well-sourced, relevant, and aimed at improving the accuracy of the article. I provided credible news sources, and I made sure to include these in my updates.

Furthermore, I was open to discussing any issues on the talk page as you suggested. However, I was blocked without any substantial discussion or specific feedback on why my edits were deemed 'completely unacceptable.'

Such actions, I believe, undermine the principles of Wikipedia, which encourage open collaboration and constructive editing based on reliable sources. Blocking my account without proper dialogue seems to be an unjust and biased decision.

I kindly request you to reconsider this block and provide specific reasons for the issues with my edits. am more than willing to make necessary changes based on constructive feedback. Let's work together to improve the article in a fair and unbiased manner.

Sincerely, 68.160.217.181 (talk) 03:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits violated neutral point of view, as I have said. Also, you are edit warring. Try to engage constructively when your block expires. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:26, 12 February 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I wrote a polite protest, but it was soon deleted. All my opinions were ignored, and anything that didn't align with their thoughts or feelings was deleted. I had no place to voice my thoughts. I just tried to communicate because there was no way to communicate. :I am not familiar with Wikipedia, and I had trouble locating the discussion page, which led me to repeatedly respond to users (Muboshgu and MaterialsPsych) personally. While this may not be a problem for someone like those who are familiar with Wikipedia, it can be challenging for a beginner like me. But Myboshgu's lack of consideration for this and your emotional approach to this issue is a problem. :Muboshgu claims my text is 'incredibly biased', but I just wrote the facts. 'Amy Klobuchar's tenure as Hennepin County Attorney has been marred by controversial cases ... Despite her role as lead prosecutor, evidence suggests that Klobuchar failed to ensure fair trials ... From the questionable tactics employed by her office to secure a conviction, to the failure to consider the validity of evidence, Klobuchar's handling of Haynes' case raises serious concerns about her commitment to justice.' Where exactly in this is not factual and is biased? She has not even apologized to the victim. But, to me, Muboshgu's use of the term 'incredibly' itself shows that Muboshgu is approaching this issue with a biased perspective and emotionally. :However, if this is the issue, I'm willing to revise it but Muboshgu never gave me a chance to make corrections, nor did they provide any specific guidance on what parts they considered biased or incorrect. Muboshgu simply dismissed my input without any constructive feedback, which I believe is not conducive to a healthy discussion or the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia. I am open to constructive criticism and willing to make changes, but I need clear guidance on what should be revised. :In addition, I clearly wrote in the discussion that I include the reference in the second and the third edits after I learned how to include references. That's why I couldn't include citation in the first edit. But "MaterialsPsych" wrote that I violated a copyright. :So, You all are willing to abandon, block, and silence users who are not familiar with editing Wikipedia, just because you are accustomed to it. You handle things dictatorially, based on your emotions and your biases. :Reflect on whether this aligns with the spirit of Wikipedia or if you, as the ones in power, have become no different from the monsters you criticize and despise.

Decline reason:

The spirit o wikipedia is WP:BRD and WP:NPOV. Please see the following. 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) 06:32, 12 February 2024 (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.

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.

For any administrator that reviews this unblock request, relevant discussion may be found at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Regarding Amy Klobuchar Document. MaterialsPsych (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia Administrator,

I appreciate your detailed explanation and guidance regarding Wikipedia's principles, such as WP:BRD and WP:NPOV, and the policy against edit warring. I understand that my previous actions did not align with these principles and I sincerely apologize for this.

As a novice editor, I encountered difficulties in navigating the discussion pages and was not fully aware of the extent of the implications of an edit war. I understand now that it is important to engage in constructive discussions on the relevant talk pages rather than engaging in repetitive edits and I commit to adhere to this in the future.

The incidents with Muboshgu and MaterialsPsych were mainly due to my lack of knowledge about the protocol. However, I must point out that it was not my intention to evade responsibility for my actions. Rather, I was under the impression that the editing privileges were being misused against me. Going forward, I will strive to express my views in a fact-based and respectful manner and work collaboratively with other editors, in order to contribute to a balanced and fair editing environment.

My initial edits were driven by a genuine concern for presenting an unbiased view of Marvin Haynes' case. As a member of a minority race, I felt compelled to present a counter perspective to what I perceived as a bias towards a white female prosecutor. I based my edits on factual information and it was disheartening to see that they were met with what I perceived as racially prejudiced reactions.

I understand that Wikipedia values neutrality and consensus among its contributors. I commit to adhering to these principles and will strive to engage in constructive discussions to present a balanced view. I hope that this explanation demonstrates my understanding of Wikipedia's policies and my willingness to abide by them. I look forward to your positive consideration for my unblock request.

Thank you,

Decline reason:

Chatbot generated requests are not accepted. This scored 97%. 331dot (talk) 01:12, 13 February 2024 (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.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Amy Klobuchar, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please use Talk:Amy Klobuchar to discuss any massive changes to the article rather than edit warring. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:02, 15 February 2024 (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.