User talk:Raoulmachal

Hello, Raoulmachal, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Jason from nyc (talk) 14:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:20, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and WP:BLP violations at Q Society of Australia. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 12:40, 7 February 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

if this is an example how WP deals with hard-left agitprops seeking to run their political agenda, no wonder Jimmy has to come begging for donations time and again.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. only (talk) 11:27, 8 February 2014 (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.

September 2014

Hello, I'm Bahudhara. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Battle of Broken Hill seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. 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. Bahudhara (talk) 03:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And more. There is no consensus on the article's Talk page for use of the word "terrorism", and no source that describes it as such. You are applying original research, which is unacceptable. Please don't change it again. People are watching and this can only lead to negative results for you. HiLo48 (talk) 03:21, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should not have changed the article again without discussion. Your are displaying unacceptable obsession here. HiLo48 (talk) 03:21, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for an indefinite period

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for this edit where you explicitly threatened another editor with some kind of serious retribution. I note also edits such as this and this where you took an entirely unhelpful approach to other editors, as well as this post where you abused another editor and this post which could also be reasonably interpreted as a threat. Leaving aside Wikipedia's zero-tolerance attitude to legal and other threats, the attitude demonstrated by these posts strongly indicates that you are not here to work with other editors to cooperatively build an encyclopaedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Nick-D (talk) 08:10, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]