User talk:Angustyre

July 2021

Hello, I'm Skyerise. I noticed that you recently removed content from Alan Turing without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Skyerise (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Alan Turing. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Skyerise (talk) 13:05, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please stop. The basic truth here is that if all or most editors involved in a discussion disagree with you, in most cases you are simply wrong — or in violation of site policies (such as WP:UNDUE) — or both. Your personal opinions carry no weight here; only reliable sources do. Unfortunately, virtually all campaigns referencing "corrupt admins" and "cabals" arise from the same inexhaustible source of folly: I can't possibly be wrong, so everyone else must be. DoctorJoeE ^Stalk/_Talk 13:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The expert didn't know about the Manhattan Project:" - you did see that the expert stated this assessment in 1993, right? Skyerise (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then the so-called "expert" should have known the Allies had atomic weapons by the early summer of 1945. (Angustyre (talk) 13:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC))[reply]

^^^ this definitely non-expert needs to learn some respect. Have a nice day! Skyerise (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I studied World War II for a degree. (Angustyre (talk) 13:51, 8 July 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Really? Could you point us to a copy of your dissertation? Skyerise (talk) 13:52, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gladly! (Angustyre (talk) 13:56, 8 July 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Oh, and the expert edited six volumes of British Intelligence in the Second World War. Can you provide a similar credential? Skyerise (talk) 13:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it make any difference with respect to your proposed edit. Even the highest and mightiest expert would still have to open a Request for Comment. Skyerise (talk) 14:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Open a request then. That six volume history is considered badly outdated now, just like "The World at War". (Angustyre (talk) 14:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC))[reply]

I can only assume that you have no more than a BA, if even that... You must leave the article alone until you can show consensus. There's rarely any way to do that but an official poll of keep or delete opinions. Free discussion doesn't get closure. Guess you're afraid you're wrong... Skyerise (talk) 14:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Alan Turing and Talk:Alan Turing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 13:50, 10 July 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

The talk page on Alan Turing now accepts I was correct all along, and that the ridiculous "14 million" figure should be removed from the lede as it ignored the Soviet contribution. Angustyre (talk) 12:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Being correct is not sufficient. See, for example, WP:EW. Yamla (talk) 13:17, 14 July 2021 (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.