User talk:GrindMocha

Final warning

If you persist in treating those who disagree with you or who attempt to explain Wikipedia policy to you as enemies, I will remove your editing privileges. Stop, slow down, and stop arguing with everyone you encounter. This is an administrator warning. Acroterion (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 17:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since you haven't stopped after explicit warnings, I've blocked you for a short time. If this conduct recurs, the next block will be longer or permanent. Stop treating Wikipedia as a battleground with enemies to be vanquished. Acroterion (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

You claim victim so quick, while editors like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Snooganssnoogans have actual hit-lists in their talk page, but they are the right kind of hit list - just another example of bias. Thanks for letting me waste time of yours on this beautiful day, although we both know you werent going outside. You will continue doing this for free as you are an internet janitor and a lonely, greasy cretin who offers no value to the world.

Decline reason:

More personal attacks in your unblock request. Talk page access revoked. Sro23 (talk) 17:31, 18 July 2020 (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.

Discretionary sanctions alerts

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.

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 governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. 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 abortion. 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 pseudoscience and fringe science. 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 17:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page

I suggest to rewrite it in a way that doesn't suggest WP:BATTLEGROUND or WP:NOTHERE, WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, etc. The bias of articles should be that of the reliable sources (WP:NPOV, WP:RS) not the personal opinions of editors. Thanks, —Paleo Neonate – 00:20, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]