User talk:Neo the Enlightened One
Welcome!
[edit]
Getting StartedTutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.
The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.
The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.
Tips- Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
- It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
- If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
- Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
- When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
- If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
- Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.
Happy editing! Cheers, Abo Yemen✉ 13:59, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
Doug Weller talk 14:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
November 2024
[edit]
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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
- Greetings Drmies, please don't revert all the legitimate/sourced and peer reviewed edits under clause: Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Edits by and on behalf of banned and blocked editors "This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (changes that are obviously helpful, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand)". "Editors in turn are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned or blocked editor (sometimes called proxy editing or proxying) unless they are able to show that the changes are productive and they have independent reasons for making such edits. Editors who reinstate edits made by a banned or blocked editor take complete responsibility for the content." Neo the Enlightened One (talk) 04:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Neo the Enlightened One (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello Wikipedia, I am asking to be unblocked because I did not use any of my multiple accounts for any disruptive or illegitimate reasons. Having multiple accounts are allowed if they contribute positively, and you can check the editing history for Neo the Enlightened One https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Neo_the_Enlightened_One, the account has consistently been used to add credible and sourced information, while improving articles and a balanced POV on multiple pages, all with sources. I reiterate again, having multiple accounts is legitimate on your platform, as long as they are used for good purposes and to improve the Encyclopedia. I have so far as you see above, not used any of these accounts in a malevolent way, or to disrupt any articles whatsoever. I implore you to review my overall edits, as well as behavior in general and any/all information I've added to the open Encyclopedia. Please sincerely, reconsider my current block status, thank you!
Decline reason:
Closing as you say you don't mind being blocked, there is therefore no reason for you to request unblock. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
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.
- What's your legitimate reason for operating multiple accounts? -- asilvering (talk) 04:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, it makes managing and tracking all of my edits easier, and I don't have to watch so many pages of interest, which can be very overwhelming. Some of the accounts have also not been used whatsoever or will ever be used, and were made just for keeping a watchlist. I've ensured to never engage anybody on their Talk Page or issues of discussion on contentious topics with more than one account, as that would be creating a false illusion of support, or fake discussions. Neo the Enlightened One (talk) 05:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- I personally don't mind being blocked anymore as it's understandable given the clauses, but I would just like confirmation that my editing history and contributions to Wikipedia have been good and none disruptive nor abusive, and I am being blocked from your platform for major Sockpuppetry, and for this I am once again sincerely sorry, you will never see me again. Just please review the pages on your articles, as nobody else was adding the latest and newer material, checking the information and sources to ensure Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and that there is no Wikipedia:No original research. Neo the Enlightened One (talk) 05:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with the block, it is fully justified, and I apologize for my Sockpuppet accounts. Thank you for closing my unblock request, and goodbye forever Wikipedia. I'm leaving for good this time, I promise! Take it easy, and all the best! Neo the Enlightened One (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)