| Revision as of 04:00, 16 September 2020 edit97.112.201.44 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:48, 16 September 2020 edit undoGirth Summit (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators98,766 edits DeclineNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| {{unblock reviewed|I was making useful contributions. The page as it stands is inaccurate. By the logic of "But it conforms to secondary sources" then I can find secondary sources that say Mark Zuckerberg is a lizard person and the earth is flat. Does that mean I can edit the respective pages to reflect those secondary sources? It is completely fair to say that his last words were incoherent.|decline=If you want to post ], you can start a blog. You can't do that on this website. ] (]) 03:53, 16 September 2020 (UTC)}} | {{unblock reviewed|I was making useful contributions. The page as it stands is inaccurate. By the logic of "But it conforms to secondary sources" then I can find secondary sources that say Mark Zuckerberg is a lizard person and the earth is flat. Does that mean I can edit the respective pages to reflect those secondary sources? It is completely fair to say that his last words were incoherent.|decline=If you want to post ], you can start a blog. You can't do that on this website. ] (]) 03:53, 16 September 2020 (UTC)}} | ||
| {{unblock|It's no more or less my own personal analysis than it is a personal analysis being sourced for the quote that exists on the page. |
{{unblock reviewed | 1=It's no more or less my own personal analysis than it is a personal analysis being sourced for the quote that exists on the page. The audio is so unclear, in fact, that it's been deemed necessary to put in the source to NOT change the quote to a line that people obviously continuously hear. I thought accuracy was paramount for wiki. Does a real encyclopedia cite sources as long as what they claim is in line with the source or do they only cite sources when they're more than reasonably sure that those sources are accurate? | decline = This does not address the reason you were blocked, indeed it demonstrates very clearly that you don't understand why what you were doing it disruptive, and that you will probably do it again. If you make another request like this, your ability to edit this page will likely be revoked. ]] 05:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)}} | ||
Revision as of 05:48, 16 September 2020
97.112.201.44 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The MOST that can be said about Ricardo Lopez's final word(s) is that they are incoherent
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 Misplaced Pages, 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. 331dot (talk) 23:44, 15 September 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.
97.112.201.44 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was making useful contributions. The page as it stands is inaccurate. By the logic of "But it conforms to secondary sources" then I can find secondary sources that say Mark Zuckerberg is a lizard person and the earth is flat. Does that mean I can edit the respective pages to reflect those secondary sources? It is completely fair to say that his last words were incoherent.
Decline reason:
If you want to post your own personal analysis, you can start a blog. You can't do that on this website. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:53, 16 September 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.
97.112.201.44 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
It's no more or less my own personal analysis than it is a personal analysis being sourced for the quote that exists on the page. The audio is so unclear, in fact, that it's been deemed necessary to put in the source to NOT change the quote to a line that people obviously continuously hear. I thought accuracy was paramount for wiki. Does a real encyclopedia cite sources as long as what they claim is in line with the source or do they only cite sources when they're more than reasonably sure that those sources are accurate?
Decline reason:
This does not address the reason you were blocked, indeed it demonstrates very clearly that you don't understand why what you were doing it disruptive, and that you will probably do it again. If you make another request like this, your ability to edit this page will likely be revoked. GirthSummit (blether) 05:47, 16 September 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.