User talk:Herantifastory

Welcome!

Hi Herantifastory! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Eisfbnore ^(会話) 16:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING???? You are absolutely a white supremacist suppressing free speech in a Wikipedia comment section. You are using the language of an editor to bury dissent and further a white supremacist agenda in the public forum. I am making factual statements about Wikipedia Featured articles on their nomination pages and in fact could not be more topical, relevant, or well-placed. This is censorship. There is no reason to suppress my posts except for furthering an agenda of military propaganda and you will be reported. Herantifastory (talk) 17:28, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most of your comments were on the archive pages of closed discussions. It's not censorship, it's housekeeping. I'm sure you'd rather have your unwelcome rant on a live discussion page than an unwatched archive. If you want to report Eisfbnore then WP:ANI is the forum to do so, but be ready for a WP:BOOMERANG. Cabayi (talk) 17:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Views on military articles

Hi. I noticed that you have posted a message on some featured article discussions to protest the concentration on western military topics. Posting these views in the middle of a quality review is not very productive. The comment will be seen as disruptive and your only audience will be the people who you see as the problem. Instead, I would suggest that you start a discussion at the Wikipedia:Village pump, which will allow your comments to be seen and considered by a broader audience. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These are their nomination pages; the fact that they're used for quality review is incidental. Disrupting facism and machines of propaganda is absolutely the point, and admin, other voters, and reviewers are meant to take notice. I absolutely have every right to post my objection, even if it's long-winded, just as you have the right to post your support. Herantifastory (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are right ways to do things and wrong ways to do things. If your professed intent is to disrupt Wikipedia to make a political or ideological point, then I expect that your account will be blocked very shortly and you will have achieved nothing. If you want to work with Wikipedia to consider alternative view points then I suggest you take a more constructive approach to discussion. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You really have no nuance of language. I can play by the rules, but acting like an authoritarian doesn't mean that you know what the rules actually are, or whether the community ever agreed upon them. I have no intent to "disrupt" anything except what is already clearly disrupting Wikipedia: white western militaries. Wikipedia has factually had 23 Featured Articles on military subjects in its first four months of 2020, with no month containing less than 5 articles on the subject. Wikipedia, on its very own home page, has already become a de facto source of military propaganda. To call this travesty a disruption is an understatement, and it will be overcome. Herantifastory (talk) 18:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Herantifastory, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Accusing others of being white supremacists is wholly inappropriate, especially for nothing other than giving you a standard warning about use of talk pages. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Herantifastory and WP:NOTHERE

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

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 ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HELP!

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).

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

Request reason:

This is not a military encyclopedia!

Decline reason:

This is so far beyond what is remotely acceptable, I have revoked talk page access. Yamla (talk) 20:15, 11 May 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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

UTRS 30527

UTRS #30527 was submitted on 2020-05-11 20:25:10. This review is now closed. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 22:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]