212.243.160.252

January 2014

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Leah McGrath Goodman, you may be blocked from editing. Ruby Murray 11:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

How quoting Leah McGrath Goodman herself could be considered defamatory? Is she or are you ashamed of what she wrote? You are the one disrupting by preventing me to quote her works.. Ruby Murray

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Leah McGrath Goodman, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Ruby Murray 15:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Rubby Murray, you are the one that makes defamatory and unfair comments here, I am creating an account tonight and will submit your lies to wikipedia policies moderators. Quoting the author on her oen wikipedia page IS NOT libel, so stop lying. Do you have an agenda by protecting Leah McGrath Goodman from facts?

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Alexf^(talk) 16:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Rubby Murray gave wrong reasons to justify the systematic edits she performed. What this user called libel and defamatory comments were actually 2 direct Leahh MacGrath quotes, one from her personnal webpage, the other from an article published on Newsweek. RM was the one reversing the changes for wrong reasons by qualifying these verifiable quotes by the derogatory term of libel, circumventing and exploiting wikipedia rules in an inadequate manner. If I look at the block reason, it says I violated the 3RR rule. However, previous warning from user RB was "The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial conten". How could you warn of something - which is wrong because no libel involved, but then use another reason to block someone?

Decline reason:

The three-revert rule is a bright-line rule, the violation of which almost invariably results in a block. There is no requirement to warn a user before blocking in such an instance. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:19, 10 January 2014 (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.

---