| Revision as of 19:27, 19 November 2021 editInNeed95 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users616 edits →Add on← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:29, 19 November 2021 edit undoInNeed95 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users616 edits Removed declined Unblock request.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{unblock reviewed|decline=You were absolutely edit warring; there is no other way to describe your actions . Since you fail to acknowledge this, I am declining this request. --] (]) 14:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)|1=I have been unblocked indef by ]. The reason was "Edit-Warring". Hilarious. I didnt. Though it is understandable, why a person might think of it. I indeed did the same edit as prior to my recent block. Though I did it with caution. I requested that the user who reverted the Edit to join the TP. I only did that once. I did not look forward for additional edits. Actually, I assumed that the reverter would revert the edit again. I wanted to use that non-cooperation behaviour (the edit) in a "protection request", "requesting for dispute solution" or starting a "noticeboard discussion".. etc.. Though now, this I am unable to do so. --] (]) 13:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)}} | |||
| ==Add on== | ==Add on== | ||
Revision as of 19:29, 19 November 2021
Add on
I am not looking forward to find "excuses" or something similar like El_C would love claim it... I am pro finding solutions and neutral POV. Looking at my edit history it is clear that 90% of them are in favour of the points mentioned. I would request people to join the started Discussions on the TP. 1 A actual Edit-Warrior wouldnt even think of doing this. Even the prior to the recent block, I looked forward to find a solution thru discussions. El_C did fail to have a overview over the dispute and failed to find a fair solution. If the reviewing admin takes some time with this problem, he/she will surely understand. --InNeed95 (talk) 13:55, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
@Blablubbs: You re confused. I literally explained that I know it might look like edit warring. I acknowledge that I indirectly did it. I meant that I directly do it. Like on porpuse. I explained why I did revert the edit (diff given above by me). As such, I dont know what u re talking about. --InNeed95 (talk) 15:20, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm having trouble parsing this comment. You state that blocking you for edit-warring was
Hilarious
becausedidnt
, yet alsoacknowledge that indirectly did it
anddirectly it
? In any case: Edit warring is the act of repeatedly overriding someone else's edit in order to reinstate your preferred version of a page. That is unambiguously what you are doing on Serbia, in spite of multiple blocks for it. It does not matter whether you have reason to believe that your version is the "correct" one (all edit warriors do) or whether you also participate in a talk page discussion; it is still disruptive, and it is still edit warring. I believe El C's block is necessary to prevent further disruption, and as such I stand behind my decline. You are welcome to make another unblock request (I strongly recommend reading WP:EW and WP:GAB first), which will be reviewed by someone else. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Blablubbs: I see. I am sorry for writing things down confusingly. I am stressed and didnt really pay attention. I know very well what "Edit-Warring" is. You dont have to repeat it to me. / I did not believe/see the version that I reverted to as "correct" nor as "prefered". The sentence, which seems to be controversial, was changed by a Sock at first (now blocked indef) and later on by another user. Both without a consense. As such, I reverted the most likely nationalistic POV changes made by those two and asked to join the TP discussion I started. One user did join after 1-2 reverts, though continued to edit the sentence in question again and again without a consense. 1 234 Unfortunatly, I fell for the provocation and also reverted his edits. 567
- Since my will to resolve the dispute isnt respected (which to be fair, I myself failed to choose the right way to solve the issue thru my reverts), I will refrain from editing the Article Serbia again and also be more cautious in general, if I hopefully get unblocked.
- I understand your Viewpoint on the issue User:Blablubbs. I agree, that disruptive editing shouldnt be unpunished. As such, your decline is understandable. Though I hope that you understand my explaination on the issue, too. Additionally I hope that the next Admin to review my next Unblock request does aswell. Best Regards, --InNeed95 (talk) 19:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)