User talk:Wkretz86

Welcome!

Hello, Wkretz86, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Hate group have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I provided factual information describing the "ADL" on the "Hate Speech" page quoting Noam Chomsky whose information is on the ADL's page itself. Provided the exact same credible source and not only was it removed but I have been blocked by "NeilN" (who somehow how 127,000 edits) from providing further factual information. I thought Wikipedia was about the absolute truth with no bias? Wkretz86 (talk) 00:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to revert without gaining consensus on the talk page then all you're going to do is get yourself blocked again (especially if you edit while logged out). WP:THETRUTH might be worth a read. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Hate group. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Calton | Talk 01:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hate group. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Calton | Talk 01:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Hate group. 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 ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your continued slow edit war

Needs to stop now. Get consensus at the talk page. WP:3RR doesn't mean that you can continue your edit war but more slowly. If you continue to make such edits without consensus you are likely to be blocked, possibly by me. Easy though to avoid a block, just get agreement. If you can't, find something else to edit. Doug Weller talk 14:29, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well then let's have a debate. Putting the ADL in the same group as the SPLC is an insult to American civil liberties. The ADL are themselves a foreign hate group that are given accreditation to monitor other hate groups. Wkretz86 (talk) 04:29, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:11, 6 July 2018 (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).

Wkretz86 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I provided facts and cited sources pertaining to ADL. I also started a discussion as to why they shouldn't be held in the same regard as the SPLC and not only did nobody join the discussion but I was outright banned.Wkretz86 (talk) 02:42, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please take the agenda that you seem to have elsewhere. I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 07:43, 8 July 2018 (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.

You really need to read guide to appealing blocks. byteflush _Talk 03:53, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 07:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hate groups

I have provided multiple sources including quotes from the acclaimed author Noam Chomsky, as to why the ADL shouldn't be given accreditation to monitor hate groups. They are a close minded, racist right wing group. Wkretz86 (talk) 08:12, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And according to you, also a foreign one. Doug Weller talk 12:52, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: can you please revoke talk page access? see [1] EvergreenFir (talk) 04:54, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Doug Weller talk 07:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]