User talk:Princeofpeacex

June 2022

Hello, I'm Adakiko. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Italians with this edit that didn't seem very civil, so I removed it. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 09:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm DoubleGrazing. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Ethnic groups in Europe, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove information from articles, as you did to Italians. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Princeofpeacex, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Dr.Pinsky (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some unsolicited advice

Any further revert at Italians would be a violation of WP:3RR. Please be cautious. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, use the sandbox for that. If you need help, you can visit the Teahouse or ask me on my talk page. Regards. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 20:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Special:Diff/1091608075. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Continued edit warring at Italians

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Long term edit warring and ignoring all feedback.

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 ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. Any admin may lift this block if they become convinced you will follow Wikipedia policy in the future. EdJohnston (talk) 17:41, 28 June 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have been blocked for reverting vandalism of the article Page: Italians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and making it conform to the referenced papers. The user User:Venezia Friulano refuses to debate in the talk section of the article and to explain his reasons, instead he has been edit warring and pushing his own version going against the aforementioned scientific papers used as references. If this website really cares about being as close as possible to academic and scientific consensus, then the admins should block the user Venezia Friulano. Princeofpeacex (talk) 06:42, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See WP:NOTTHEM. Your request should only discuss your actions. There are proper channels here that you have not availed yourself of, after giving talk page discussion a chance.(it must be given time, as this is a volunteer project) 331dot (talk) 09:14, 29 June 2022 (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.

.

I've simplified your internal link, we don't need the whole URL in that case. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 29 June 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Thanks confirming that this board does not care about being objective and gives preference to certain users despite going against what scientific papers used as references say. After all it's an "volunteer project" and anyone can be an admin regardless of his scientific background, so it makes sense. Hahahahaha Princeofpeacex (talk) 10:06, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:31, 29 June 2022 (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.

That isn't anything close to what I said. There are encyclopedia projects where only vetted experts in a topic can contribute about it, if that is more to your liking. 331dot (talk) 14:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]