June 2020
edit
Your recent editing history at Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
- Yes, you've gone over 3 reverts while Another Believer hasn't. Kingsif (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you attempt to make unconstructive edits and trigger the edit filter.
- After the one real warning I gave you, plus the two Another Believer did, this is your final warning notice for being a WP:SPA disruptive editor. Any more unproductive edits, and you will be blocked. Kingsif (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Led me make something completely clear to you. Another Believer went well above 3 edits. I have made numerous other edits that are not part of the homosexual debate. This threat is admin abuse and harassment pure and simple. If it continues, I will urge for the removal of your admin privileges as this is stifling legitimate concern on a Wiki project potentially violating NPOV. Somua35 (talk) 21:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Blocked
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)- Wikipedia's neutrality doesn't mean we pretend that bigotry and acceptance are equal. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Somua35 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
My apologies. I am here to build an encyclopedia in history. The gay edits were intended to help out the administration by making aware of a bias that is perceived even thought Wiki Loves events are neutral and don't support one viewpoint. I thought that Another Believer was abusing his rights and would receive abritration sanctions. Perhaps I have allowed personal experiences of abuse cloud my articulation and judgement. I will stick to editing historical things as I have done in the past. I will refrain from LGBT issues or other heated social matters. Somua35 (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Your claim that you are here to work on history articles is not supported by your edit history. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 23:42, 8 July 2020 (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.
- 61% of your pre-block edits related to LGBT matters. Your very first edit was to downplay the acceptance of it in the United States and a full dozen were to argue or defend edits arguing that homosexuality is morally equivalent to Nazism and a greater threat to America than Covid-19, fascism, police brutality, systemic racism, political and financial corruption, the upcoming housing market crash... Honestly, if you're more scared of homosexuality than Covid-19 or fascism, you don't need to be editing history articles, either. The edits you've made to history articles were generally minor edits. Going from sheer edit count to the amount of ink you have spilled, you've made 125 bytes worth of changes relating to history but 3768 bytes worth of changes relating to LGBT matters. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Somua35 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I will be here to edit history and will refrain from controversial subjects in the future. How should I demonstrate my sincerity in trying to learn from this and make Wikipedia a better place?Somua35 (talk) 00:15, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I can't say that I disagree with the assessments given above, after looking at things myself. You could agree to a broad topic ban from any and all posting related to LGBT issues or matters(that includes articles, talk pages, or any other page), and describe a specific, substantive(more than fixing grammar or spelling) edit you want to make to a history-related article. Even then, it's not a guarantee that you would be unblocked, but it would be a step in the right direction. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 00:38, 9 July 2020 (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.