User talk:Al.Qudsi

May 2017

This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at Talk:Bill Nye, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Toddst1 (talk) 22:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alerts, please read

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 17:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above apply on talk pages, including yours - one more talk page post like the one you posted today and you'll be blocked

You don't seem to be here to seriously work on the encyclopedia in any case. Doug Weller talk 17:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:58, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

==

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Al.Qudsi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I DONT KNOW WHY I WAS BLOCKED Al.Qudsi (talk) 20:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This was unacceptable. PhilKnight (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

==

I know you are a PRIVATE COMPANY - and I thought you are interested in SOME FREE SPEECH DIALOG ! You have some "FACTS" wrong ! And sometimes you OMIT information... And again, I am not sure why I was blocked...

You are entitled to behave like FASCISTS.... The person who blocked me states:: Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia ! HA HA - if I said something that person does not agree with me, they think THEY ARE THE BUILDERS OF KNOWLEDGE???

I use Wikipedia to research various subjects! I found that in some subjects THAT I HAVE GREAT KNOWLEDGE IN, the person who administers that subject is IGNORANT but they will not admit, in spite of EXPLANATION, that what they have IS WRONG and GARBAGE !

I think you should unblock me, just to prove me wrong that you are FASCISTS!

TO STRESS -- I AM NOT YET TO LEARN WHY I WAS BLOCKED AT THE FIRST PLACE!

How about this?[1]? That's not helping to build the encyclopaedia. See also WP:FREESPEECH Doug Weller talk 21:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Al.Qudsi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I DONT KNOW WHY I WAS BLOCKED Al.Qudsi (talk) 11:51, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As you lack sufficient competence to understand why you were blocked, and as you are blatantly abusing the unblock template, I have revoked talk page access. If you later figure out why and can explain how you would edit significantly differently, WP:UTRS is available to you. Yamla (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Somebody decided that MY CORRECTING YOUR ERRORS does not constitute A WILL TO BUILD AN ENCYCLOPEDIA...

Here is a correction... SPARTACUS the movie from 1960 is FALSELY reported as if it is based on a novel by HOWARD FAST It is not so... it is based on the novel by VLADIMIR (ZE'EV) ZABOTINSKY! My family owned, and I read this novel myself, as a lad!

It also stated in the credits of the movie... VLADIMIR ZABOTINSKY not HOWARD FAST

Go build an encyclopedia! Don't be FASCISTS and SNOBS - you are often WRONG !