Shoggle123
Welcome!
editHi Shoggle123! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! —C.Fred (talk) 01:02, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
September 2023
editHi, I have reverted your reversion to Nicola Thorp. My edit wasn't vandalism - I had checked the source and have done so again. Your words "to demonstrate just how irritating it is when false accusations are made against you ... noting that the ordinary reasonable reader would have completely understood the non-defamatory lesson that Fox was trying to teach Thorp" just aren't in the source. There is no mention of "irritating" in the source, for instance. Please assume good faith from other editors, and take this to the article's Talk page if needed. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 06:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
November 2023
edit
Hello, I'm Lazylaces. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Nicola Thorp—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Lazylaces (Talk to me) 00:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Nicola Thorp. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Lazylaces (Talk to me) 00:50, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Nicola Thorp, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Lazylaces (Talk to me) 00:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Shoggle123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
A vandal has been removing properly sourced content from a page without reason or explanation. I have already explained how the sane is properly sourced. This vandal offered no argument or reasoned critique against anything I previously said. He simply removed the sourced content from the page and left threatening and bullying comments on my page essentially telling me to give in to his vandalism or be banned. I refused to give in to his vandalim, and he appears to have had one his friends ban me. This is a clear and blatant abuse of process. How can it be right for someone to remove valid and sourced content from a page, without discussion or argument, and simply demand that everyone else agree with you? Shoggle123 (talk) 00:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Content disputes are not WP:VANDALISM. Reaching consensus on the article talk page is necessary when material has been challenged by other editors. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 03:26, 1 December 2023 (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.
Shoggle123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Ok, so why hasn't Lazylaces also been indefinitely banned then? After all, he did the exact same thing I did. He also simply repeatedly inserted his preferred version of the page without attempting to 'reach consensus on the talk page' after his view had been challenged by me. If anything, his conduct is worse than mine. I have already explained repeatedly why the text was supported by the source (with citations) (even if I strictly didn't do it in the right place on the talk page). He nowhere engaged with what I said at all. So why do I get thrown out indefinitely while he gets away scot free? Shoggle123 (talk) 12:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
See WP:NOTTHEM. Your request should only discuss your actions, not those of others. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 1 December 2023 (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.
Shoggle123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Thank you for hiding behind bureauocracy rather than answering a perfectly valid and pertinent question. I'll keep this simple. I request an unblock so I can do what you have told me I should have done - namely 'reach consensus on the talk page' first before editing the page any further. If those are the rules, then fine. I can obey them. And if Lazylaces can also obey them, then there shouldn't be a problem Shoggle123 (talk) 15:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You are again talking about another editor after being told, very clearly, not to do so. I also found 
Confirmed sockpuppetry, putting an end to any question as to whether you are acting in good faith. Yamla (talk) 15:46, 1 December 2023 (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.