User talk:Marxistanarchistcapitalistyogi69

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Rasmussen Reports shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Chetsford (talk) 05:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marxistanarchistcapitalistyogi69. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 06:03, 18 December 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).

Marxistanarchistcapitalistyogi69 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

A malicious user has reported me for sockpuppetry after removing an edit I made on Rasmussen reports (the user: Chetsford). None of the accounts that I am being compared to have made edits in the last 3 months. Yes, they all mainly edited the same page I did, but this is an election year and the wikipedia article in question has to do with the election in the US. I am going to dispel the particular reasons leveled against me. Statistically there has to be a huge correlation between users with few edits, not having a profile page, and having most of your edits on one page. The last reason, that I am in the same geographic area as the other users, is also not a good reason as the article in question has to do mainly with the United States. Additionally, I would like to reprimand the user who targeted me for sockpuppetry, as they did this after reverting an edit of mine without giving me a comment as to why (and I requested a comment.) Additionally, why would someone create a screen name like mine if they were engaged in sockpuppetry? I would expect this to be something would try to be doing slyly. And furthermore, there is no demonstrable reason why someone would do this, given the small number of edits of most of these users.

Decline reason:

This is not factually accurate. Sixohthree and Joshdchang04 are not stale. Nor is it appropriate to accuse an editor of being malicious for filing a good-faith sockpuppet investigation, particularly when this demonstrated a likely violation of WP:SOCK. Yamla (talk) 11:49, 31 December 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.