User talk:Advancingreturns

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).

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

Request reason:

I am trying to build the page on the basis of deductive reasoning. There is an editorial cabal on the page which is resisting this. P Aculeius, etc, have reverted many of my edits within less than 24 hours. They are attributing material as evidence which is clearly not evidence and drawing false conclusions from it. For example, the disputed coin is not evidence; "implication" is not "supposition", etc, etc. Please study the diffs to see what I am trying to achieve. All the refractory editors have classical usernames and obviously 'want to believe' Sponsianus existed rather than simply proceeding on the basis of the *absence* of any concrete, specific evidence. This is why I placed a POV and POV-sections. I am thinking of leaving Wikipedia if this is the standard of editing. No hard-copy Encyclopaedia would ever tolerate this standard. Advancingreturns (talk) 21:53, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You seem to be trying to justify your edit warring, not tell us why it was wrong. You are only blocked from the article itself, please discuss on the talk page. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 22:12, 27 December 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.

Note that you are not permitted to remove (or modify) declined unblock requests for your currently active block. Please do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 12:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at User:Cullen328.

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 ~~~~}}.

December 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent further vandalism.

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 ~~~~}}. Favonian (talk) 12:35, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.