User talk:Cariostatement

December 2013

EvergreenFir is a Japanese personal, keep editing this posting, by inserting fake US government archive site information. I understand Cario Declaration is not in favor or Japan, but editing it to alter history, using fake US government archive site does not help Japan.

November 2013

Hello, I'm EvergreenFir. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Cairo Declaration without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can use the 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! EvergreenFir (talk) 06:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Cairo Declaration. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Cairo Declaration. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is you alter history by adding fake URL to Wikipedia. http://www.taiwanbasic.com is NOT US government archive document site. You and Your organization created and maintain that web site, but in Wikipedia, you stated that was reference for US and UK government archive site. That is against rule in Wikipedia. If you remove all the fake URLs, remove your commentaries, for example, "The Cairo Declaration was a statement of intention". The fact is Cairo Declaration was signed agreement between countries. You are the one should be banned form Wikipedia.

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Cairo Declaration, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I am not affiliated with that website. You provide zero evidence to back up your claims and you repeatedly blank the page. If you wish to discuss it, do so on the talk page for the article. If you vandalize the page any further, I will report you to the admins for their attention. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one kept adding faked URL, by claiming that http://www.taiwanbasic.com as real US government archive site. If you don't know who maintain it, how can you insert that into Wikipedia>? Wikipedia only allows true information with known sources.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Cairo Declaration. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. —Darkwind (talk) 05:43, 3 December 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

EvergreenFir added links claimed to be US government archive site and UK government archive site, however, those are not really. From my tracing, it was operated by Japanese personal, has nothing to do with US or UK government. Thus I removed those untrue links and related commentary. When I talked to EvergreenFir, he admitted he did not know who created those web pages. He as a Japanese citizen, should avoid conflict by not introduce faked URL to Wikipedia. For maintain Wikipedia's accuracy, I removed those commentary and faked links. But he blocked me. That is not fair. He introduced faked links to Wikipedia, he is the one should be banned from wikipeida. Cariostatement (talk) 06:24, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are blocked for edit warring; the contents of your edits are not the problem (as far as this block is concerned). You'll need to address your edit warring in your unblock request. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 07:48, 3 December 2013 (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.

Note to reviewing admin

I am a US citizen. If you review the vandalized article's talk page, I provided a link to the same document from a more reliable source (University of Wisconsin Digital Collection). Cheers. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:59, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]