User talk:Stonerock10
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Leyo 22:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Stonerock10 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I believe there may have been a misunderstanding that led to me being blocked. While I was prompted to making an account by addressing what I saw as bias in the description of Dominion (2018 film), I had no intention of participating in any sort of "edit war" beyond marking the article as disputed - which I think is fair given the extensive back-and-forth on the article's talk page - and removing the characterization of the film as a "vegan" film, which I thought was an inappropriate description (I don't understand how a film can even be vegan...). I was not able to respond quickly to KoA on the article's talk page as I have been busy, which I believe led them to label me as a SPA (e.g. here), which I don't think is fair.
Obviously I am a new editor to Wikipedia and was not familiar with the concept of "edit warring" or the policies surrounding it. That being said, I did not violate any bright-line rules such as WP:3RR that would justify an indefinite ban, nor was I given any warning in accordance with WP:DNB. I was simply trying to maintain a neutral point of view in the article in question, which I felt was not being upheld, by making a single edit. I have a lot of interests beyond this single anti-factory farming documentary film: specifically I am interested in history, computer science, economics, and a range of other topics, and I feel like I have more to offer in terms of contributing to this site. It is quite discouraging that I can be blocked simply for disagreeing with someone and making a single edit. I am happy to discuss further to understand the point of view of Leyo and other admins.
Stonerock10 (talk) 00:42, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
I have decided to remove the block. I respectfully do not think that the conduct- even if viewed exactly as the blocking admin did- wasn't worth or proportional to the need of an immediate, indef sitewide block with no warning beforehand. My advice to you, given that the topic of the article seems controversial, is to stick to discussion on the article talk page for now if you are still interested in being involved with that topic. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. And yes I agree, still learning the ropes so I wasn't aware that the talk page was the best tool in this particular instance. Appreciate you taking the time to review this and for being rational. Stonerock10 (talk) 03:08, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- Warnings are not necessarily required, and edit warring does not require one to break WP:3RR, but I am curious Leyo as to why you didn't warn first as well as why you did an indef block, and not a shorter one or a partial block just from the article. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
- Completely understand that warnings are not required and that edit warring has a broader definition than breaking WP:3RR. That being said, I think it is extremely harsh to classify my actions as edit warring - as I said before I had simply made a single edit and flagged the article as contested, and did not engage in any back-and-forth beyond that. As I said earlier, I am new to wikipedia, and I did not realize these changes would be as controversially received as they were because I thought they actually made the article less subjective. It is also worth mentioning that there are other users who have regularly gone back-and-forth with edits, reverts, etc. on this article that received more lenient punishment than I did, seemingly just on the basis that their accounts are older than mine. If I were to get unblocked I would not make any further edits on this article, though I think it might be worthwhile to contribute to its talk section. Alternatively, if you think banning me from making any contribution to the talk section of this article is justified (which again, I disagree with quite strongly), then so be it, but I think that would at least be slightly more reasonable than an indefinite block from editing on the whole site. Stonerock10 (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I'm waiting to hear from Leyo before I take action. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Please see my statement in Wikipedia:Administrative action review#Block of User:KoA by User:Leyo. Please take the decision you feel is appropriate. --Leyo 07:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I'm waiting to hear from Leyo before I take action. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Completely understand that warnings are not required and that edit warring has a broader definition than breaking WP:3RR. That being said, I think it is extremely harsh to classify my actions as edit warring - as I said before I had simply made a single edit and flagged the article as contested, and did not engage in any back-and-forth beyond that. As I said earlier, I am new to wikipedia, and I did not realize these changes would be as controversially received as they were because I thought they actually made the article less subjective. It is also worth mentioning that there are other users who have regularly gone back-and-forth with edits, reverts, etc. on this article that received more lenient punishment than I did, seemingly just on the basis that their accounts are older than mine. If I were to get unblocked I would not make any further edits on this article, though I think it might be worthwhile to contribute to its talk section. Alternatively, if you think banning me from making any contribution to the talk section of this article is justified (which again, I disagree with quite strongly), then so be it, but I think that would at least be slightly more reasonable than an indefinite block from editing on the whole site. Stonerock10 (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)