User talk:Simonrankin

January 2021

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Adrienne Johnson Kiriakis, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 17:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Abigail Deveraux. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 17:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are not vandalism. It happened and I gave you a source like you wanted.Simonrankin (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Your recent editing history at Saved by the Bell‎ 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.
You have now been reverted by two editors on this, yet you persist at edit warring. If continue with this, you will be reported, and possibly blocked. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not engaged in an edit war. I'm done now. The page is correct per Wikipedia's style guides and we can all be happy about that. Good day to you.Simonrankin (talk) 02:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}. User:Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 25 March 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have only been correcting mistakes and I followed all the rules so... Yes, I am here to contribute. Unfortunately, I've just been getting reverted for no reasons and now blocked but all my edits have been constructive!Simonrankin (talk) 08:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Simonrankin (talk) 08:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The minor changes you are trying to make aren't worth the edit warring and disruption. You also don't address the block evasion claim. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 25 March 2021 (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.

331dot: I did so address the block evasion claim on the talk page where it was made! But whatever. I don't care. I'll edit from a new IP everyday from now and hound every single one of you for pretty much ever. You wanted a sock, you've all got one now. Peace out.Simonrankin (talk) 09:13, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So you're denying block evasion by stating your intention to evade the block? 331dot (talk) 09:27, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm denying block evasion because I'm not evading any block. Tomorrow, I will be. This one. See you then.Simonrankin (talk) 09:29, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now stop posting on my talk page. All of you. I can say that even when blocked and you have to leave me alone. Tah-tah!Simonrankin (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot ask the entire community to not communicate with you especially when related to community processes. If you are willing to evade this block, how do we know you weren't evading one before? 331dot (talk) 09:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does someone who is willing to commit suicide mean they must have already done it in the past? No. Because that reasoning is absurd! I'm going to evade this block because I haven't done anything wrong. And you really shouldn't want to communicate with me anyways. Are you that lonely you need to hassle someone you don't even want to have around? Poor you. I hope you eventually find at least one friend to occupy some time with. I truly do. Now please go back to pretending you're some sort of educated dude saving the world by loving errors on a free encyclopedia. The vast majority of you just use this place to feel better about the fact that you have no lives or intelligence. Bye. Until the next time you're that desperate that you need me to interest you.Simonrankin (talk) 09:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So instead of evading the block, why not confront the issue head on? You might be able to get away with evading for awhile, possibly even years but eventually you will be found out. If you want to spend your valuable time doing that, instead of addressing the underlying issues, that's your choice. It's not about me, it's about you. I want every willing contributor to be able to contribute, but you need to address this matter. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I addressed the matter! You ignored it! I can't prove I'm not someone other than saying I'm not. I told them to make a file and have someone look into it to prove it for me and they did. None of you are willing to let that happen. I was just blocked for no reason after being hounded by more than one editor for no reason. You are hounding me right now. I've told you to leave me alone and you won't. You're telling me a willing contributor is supposed to be able to contribute by being blocked indefinitely for unsubstantiated claims. Well then I think every editor ever is actually someone else and until they prove they have never been anyone else just because I say they are... they need to be blocked forever. Especially the ones who fix mistakes. Please leave me alone now.Simonrankin (talk) 10:02, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ignore anything, your request mentions nothing about block evasion. I don't see in your history where you deny block evasion. Even if you did, it's not enough to just deny it, you have to address why we might think you are socking if you aren't. Discussion with you is not "hounding"; this is a collaborative effort where communication is required. I want you to be able to contribute if you have contributions to make, but you have to be willing to work with us. I'm sorry you are choosing to go down the path you seem to want to go on, I hope you change your mind. As I said, you might be able to get away with it, but most people who do what you are attempting are eventually found out. I guess there is nothing more to say. Good day. 331dot (talk) 10:16, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you finally have nothing more to say. See you tomorrow. I'm reverting all your edits first.Simonrankin (talk) 10:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]