User talk:Other49states: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→November 2016: additional |
→November 2016: a declined unblock request is one of the few things you may not remove from your user talk page |
||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{retired}} |
|||
== Other49states, you are invited to the Teahouse! == |
|||
{| style="margin: 1em 4em;" |
|||
|- valign="top" |
|||
| [[File:WP teahouse logo 2.png|alt=Teahouse logo|link=w:en:WP:Teahouse|File:WP teahouse logo 2.png by User:Heatherawalls, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0]] |
|||
| <div style="background-color:#f4f3f0; color: #393D38; padding: 0.4em 1em;border-radius:10px; font-size: 1.1em;"> |
|||
Hi '''Other49states'''! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. <br />Be our guest at [[w:WP:teahouse|the Teahouse]]! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like {{noping|78.26}} ([[User_talk:78.26|talk]]). |
|||
<div class="submit ui-button ui-widget ui-state-default ui-corner-all ui-button-text-only" role="button" aria-disabled="false" style="float: left;"><span class="ui-button-text">[[WP:Teahouse|Visit the Teahouse]]</span></div> |
|||
<div style="text-align:right;">We hope to see you there! |
|||
<small>Delivered by {{noping|HostBot}} on behalf of the [[WP:Teahouse/Hosts|Teahouse hosts]]</small> |
|||
<small>16:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)</small></div> |
|||
</div> |
|||
|} |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation]]<!-- Template:Teahouse_HostBot_Invitation --> |
|||
== November 2016 == |
== November 2016 == |
||
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> [[File:Stop x nuvola.svg|40px|left|alt=Stop icon]] You have been '''[[WP:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Indefinite_blocks|indefinitely]]''' from editing for [[WP:Disruptive editing|abuse of editing privileges]]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may [[WP:Appealing a block|request an unblock]] by first reading the [[WP:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]], then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. --[[User:Bongwarrior|Bongwarrior]] ([[User talk:Bongwarrior|talk]]) 03:16, 7 November 2016 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-blockindef --> |
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> [[File:Stop x nuvola.svg|40px|left|alt=Stop icon]] You have been '''[[WP:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Indefinite_blocks|indefinitely]]''' from editing for [[WP:Disruptive editing|abuse of editing privileges]]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may [[WP:Appealing a block|request an unblock]] by first reading the [[WP:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]], then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. --[[User:Bongwarrior|Bongwarrior]] ([[User talk:Bongwarrior|talk]]) 03:16, 7 November 2016 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-blockindef --> |
||
| ⚫ | {{unblock reviewed | 1=''I want to edit my own user page; I don't care how many students get bad info off your site. I don't care if you try to censor dissent, its your problem not mine.'' | decline = I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that |
||
*the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, <u>or</u> |
|||
*the block is no longer necessary because you |
|||
*#understand what you have been blocked for, |
|||
*#will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and |
|||
*#will make useful contributions instead. |
|||
Please read the [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]] for more information. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 ]]</small></sup> 15:18, 7 November 2016 (UTC)}} |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
I see other users have now agreed with my complaint, and added their own references. Instead of pompous arrogant "admins" censoring everyone who tries to help wikipedia, maybe you assholes should understand how many US universities ban the use of your biased website from use in their classrooms. |
|||
Bonghead owes me and every reader of this site an apology. No one cares how many hours you "put in" to censor dissent |
|||
*I won't review this because I have made an edit to the article, but I'll offer a few words that might help you understand why you are blocked... |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
#You removed sourced material [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=747901712&oldid=742357388 here], and if such a removal is reverted then you should discuss it and seek consensus before removing it again and not edit war over it. You went on to edit war over it. |
|||
#You added an unsourced quote [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=748221267&oldid=748215676 here] in upper case, which looks like your own personal opinion, and editors must not add their own personal opinions to Wikipedia articles. You edit warred over that too. |
|||
#You added your own personal "rebuttal" [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=748226990&oldid=748225959 here]. Personal conclusions presented in Wikipedia's own voice are not permitted - only sourced conclusions from reliable sources. Again, you edit warred over it. |
|||
#In [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=748221267&oldid=748215676 this edit summary] you attacked other editors by referring to them as the "Berkley crowd". |
|||
#In [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=748227817&oldid=748227249 this edit summary] you accused others with "READ other people's views, don't just dictate what you want" when those others were merely upholding Wikipedia's policies on sourced content. |
|||
#In [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=748225756&oldid=748224214 this edit summary] you attacked another editor with "...doesn't have anything to contribute" |
|||
#In [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harry_Dexter_White&type=revision&diff=748228349&oldid=748228209 this edit summary] you called another editor an "arrogant prick" |
|||
#Below you argue that three others were reverting your edits and complain that they should have been blocked. But you against three other shows it is *you* who do not have a consensus for the changes you want, and it is *you* who must stop and discuss. |
|||
#On this talk page since your block, you have been hurling insults at everyone involved in the dispute. You have zero chance of being unblocked with this approach. [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 09:55, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
*I should add that the problem of systemic bias is a well-known one, but it's a remarkably difficult one to solve. Your approach of removing some sourced material, adding your own personal editorializing, and attacking everyone who disagrees with you is certainly not the answer. [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 09:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
*Oh, and one more thing. Below you say "''the admins are well aware of problems, and they don't plan to address them''", but that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the way Wikipedia works. Admins are not some sort of editorial board and have no more say than anyone else in deciding on Wikipedia content and policy. Admins only have the added ability to enforce Wikipedia's current policies, not to change them. Changes to article content and to policies are made by ordinary editors via the processes of discussion and consensus (see [[WP:Consensus]] for the current Wikipedia take on that). [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 10:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
== Question for administrator == |
== Question for administrator == |
||
:::::When you were blocked, you lost the privilege of editing your user page. I am willing, as an administrative action, to blank your user page. I will not add a template that you've left Wikipedia (nor will I add a template that you've been indefinitely blocked). Would you like me to just blank the content? —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 22:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
Wikipedia needs to check the censorship of your admins like Bongwarrior. Three users were doing multiple rollbacks, but bongwarrior only censored me. Its just another example of wikipedia's horrid bias and insider cliques. Bongwarrior needs to have his censorship license revoked, and I want a public apology. He was wrong, I was trying to fix real errors on your website -- and the insider cliques that run your website made sure only the outsider was punished. Is that what wikipedia is about? FIX THIS WRONG AND STOP DRAGGING YOUR FEET!!!! |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
: |
::::::: [[Ping:C.Fred]] [[User:C.Fred]] Yes, please blank all the pages. And if there is a way to specify no more emails, that would save the email company from having to mark all wikipedia mail as spam. [[User:Other49states|Other49states]] ([[User talk:Other49states#top|talk]]) 22:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
||
:: [[User:Dane2007]] thanks for the edit, I still can't edit my home page, and still have no idea why the users that undid my edits more than 3 times (a lot more) -- and this BongWarrior decides that only the new guy gets punished with an arbitrary ban. The insiders who undid my edit 6-8 times are still editing the page... and just to make insults worse, one is even making the edits I said were desperately needed. |
|||
::::::: Not sure why you won't put a {{retired}} sign on the page, but whatever severs my ties with wikipedia would work. |
|||
:: Wikipedia is an insider clique, dissenting views are not allowed, and there are way too many silly wp:??? codes and whatever an "RS" is... clearly designed to discourage people who want to help but cannot dedicate weeks and weeks learning all their secret handshakes. Many of the articles under the economics section have serious bias -- in favor of Berkley interpretation of Keynesian policy, and in favor of only Western European economists (who agree with the Berkley Keynesian theories). |
|||
:: I did learn why many universities are so adamantly against allowing students to reference wikipedia for economics topics. Any student wanting to get a broad view of the world of economic schools of thought will only get puff pieces trumpeting academic interpretations of Keynesian ideas. Even [[User:Rjensen]]'s attempt at adding other views describes Keynes as having an "innovative" proposal of a bancor... innovative? The Latin Monetary Unit in Europe preceded the bancor idea by more than a century (plenty of other examples, but it won't matter to wikipedia admins). Bretton Woods implemented SDR (special drawing rights) which aren't very different from Keynes bancor idea. SDRs are backed by IMF member contributions, bancors would have been backed by central bank reserves. |
|||
::::::::The email setting is a preference. You should be able to change that. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 22:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:: I suspect wikipedia will continue to protect insiders. It will continue to favor western european academic ideas above EVERYTHING and EVERYONE else. I found there is a whole page describing [[Criticism of Wikipedia]] articles -- the admins are well aware of problems, and they don't plan to address them. No wonder US universities don't trust wikipedia on many topics -- including economics. Admins won't listen to prominent critics in public forums, they aren't likely to care about me either. Thanks for trying, but you are wasting your time. [[User:Other49states|Other49states]] ([[User talk:Other49states#top|talk]]) 08:57, 7 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 02:04, 8 November 2016
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
November 2016
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:16, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Other49states (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I want to edit my own user page; I don't care how many students get bad info off your site. I don't care if you try to censor dissent, its your problem not mine.
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 15:18, 7 November 2016 (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.
Wikipedia is free, and you get less than what you pay for. Other49states (talk) 20:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Question for administrator
[edit]- When you were blocked, you lost the privilege of editing your user page. I am willing, as an administrative action, to blank your user page. I will not add a template that you've left Wikipedia (nor will I add a template that you've been indefinitely blocked). Would you like me to just blank the content? —C.Fred (talk) 22:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- Ping:C.Fred User:C.Fred Yes, please blank all the pages. And if there is a way to specify no more emails, that would save the email company from having to mark all wikipedia mail as spam. Other49states (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure why you won't put a Retired
- Not sure why you won't put a
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
sign on the page, but whatever severs my ties with wikipedia would work.
- The email setting is a preference. You should be able to change that. —C.Fred (talk) 22:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)