User talk:JosephStalinator

Welcome

Hello JosephStalinator and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to The Hewett Academy, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Sincerely, Redactyll (talk) 18:05, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December, 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Please ensure to maintain all of your edits as proper, not just some.

December 2018

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to City of Norwich School. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 1 December 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I revisited my edit and added a source for my information. My account was blocked on the grounds that I didn't after the mistake was corrected. JosephStalinator (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No, you didn't provide any reliable sources for any of your edits. And no, The Hewett Academy is not spelled "Hoowett". Not even if you really were a teacher there and a former headteacher at the City of Norwich School. Huon (talk) 18:47, 1 December 2018 (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.

@JosephStalinator: No, you were cearly blocked for this edit; it's a funny kind of a "historian and antiquarian" who thinks anti-semitism is ever appropriate, let alone on the internet's fifth-most visited website. FYI. ——SerialNumber54129 18:46, 1 December 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

My friend has come to stay for a couple of weeks and he is an administrator so please unblock this IP address. Remember- it is unjust to discriminate through association. JosephStalinator (talk) 11:23, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If that's true, then your administrator friend should request unblock from their account. Your unblock requests should only address your behavior. As this does not do that, I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 11:37, 2 December 2018 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I have learnt my lesson. Should I behave badly again I will have no problem with a more severe course of action being implemented. Many thanks JosephStalinator (talk) 11:42, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

So first it's unjust discrimination through association, and then when that doesn't work, just nine minutes later you have suddenly learned your lesson? I'm not buying that. Take some time off to think and then come back with a genuine appeal, rather than just parroting the words you think will work. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:53, 2 December 2018 (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.

Someone else will review your request, but I think that they will want to know exactly what the lesson is that you have learned, specifically what constructive contributions you want to make, and how we can be assured that you will not make offensive edits like the one noted above by Serial Number. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make constructive contributions about faculties I am passionate about e.g. education, politics and research in cosmology. I understand that my contributions must be reinforced with a reliable source and I shall never deliberately vandalise as I haven't before.

Thanks for reading.

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.

331dot (talk) 12:00, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you have chosen to engage in personal attacks and stated an intention to evade your block, there is nothing further to discuss. Talk page access removed. 331dot (talk) 12:01, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]