User talk:Freemanbat

November 2020

Hello Freemanbat. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Freemanbat. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Freemanbat|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Blablubbs

Hello, Freemanbat. You have new messages at Blablubbs's talk page.
Message added 22:01, 18 November 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Freemanbat, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Freemanbat! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for blatantly promotional editing, as you did at Gunter Pauli.

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 ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of blatant censorship and dictatorship is this ??? Seriously who do you think you are ?! Where do you see promotional or payments modif/edits ?? how can you let very detailed personal info and even honors (!!) and all sorts of positive things on pages such as Barack Obama, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Diego Maradona ??? What are we supposed to add for the page of Gunter Pauli ?? That he is a terrorist to please you? Most importantly the question to raise at this point is : What do you have against the page of Gunter Pauli You are a dictator User:GeneralNotability !! Freemanbat (talk) 06:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:331dot

Look User:331dot, the manner in which i am blocked altogether is radical and extreme; please understand that it constitutes a form of violence! This is the first time I was editing an entry thoroughly and my edits were not at all perfect and I learned especially from mutually respectful discussions with user:Blablubbs. This whole manner of blocking is very infantilising and demeaning ... Had I posted violent/explicit/hatred content, blocking would have been the appropriate measure indeed.. the fact that my content was not well formatted not well presented or not relevant could be addressed with direct notifications, the use of banners that we see on many pages ("this article is not objective" / this article is this or that ...). Of course there is a feeling and impression of censorship and of course I am not making a claim of free speech... Wikipedia is not the street ... Also, please look at the timing of that blocking ... what in the minutes/hours/days before, justifies such a thing ? At this stage I regret editing this page altogether, this has provoked more harm to its content than benefited it ... have a look at Gunter Pauli videos on youtube and make some research about him and you will see why I was touched and motivated to improve his wikipedia page (after getting acquainted with Gunter Pauli it would not surprise me at all if you end up yourself enriching that page to share with the rest of the world information about him and his actions to the world...). Again, "adjust your attitude to be more collaborative" is very paternalizing and unjustified ... and I have to tell you that it is making me feel like i was some sort of 'thug' ... I am a pretty well educated person (both in ethical values and schooling) in my early 30s am not used to getting a remark of this kind... what in "my attitude" is not appropriate please? (Again look at the timing! The whole content of this page, including the below section 'censorship' all came after the blocking) ... I am sure you and I would get along well in real life User:331dot though... While it is very normal and understandable that some authority should be present in wikipedia, this has to me the flavour of an abuse of authority ... when there is abuse of authority, there is no more authority ... I am sorry... Freemanbat (talk) 07:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We can only make a determination based on your actions, that is all we have done. You are free to make another request if you desire, which someone else will look at. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am no longer interested in doing anything on Wikipedia... The people involved in this violent blocking thing have made a potentially very interesting contributor to wikipedia very reluctant to carry on ... I have never shared the very skeptical and critical feeling of several of my personal and professional acquaintances towards Wikipedia, until today... Please understand that I will not make any request of "appeal" of any sort 331dot... There is abuse of authority from GeneralNotability and the way you are treating newcomers as if they were criminals to be banned from the surface of the earth is just not the right method to "build this Encyclopedia of human knowledge" as you pretend. I think people like GeneralNotability should try to be a bit more humble and try to interact with a bit of diplomacy and tactfulness towards making warning and constructive comments like Blablubbs often does so rightly... And this "you are being paid, until you prove it wrong" is very arrogant and goes beyond what should be reasonably be expected in terms of caution towards attaining neutrality. You have to understand that some topics are a source of passion and others are not... And please stop using words such as "attitude" (seriously, what did I do that is not the "right attitude" according your "holiness" ...?) you are not my mother nor God .... Both Wikipedia contributors and wikipedia at large have lost total credibility before the eyes of the keen newcomer contributor that I used to be (Europe based 3 Master degrees, current PhD student, 5 languages, multiple careers...). And please make sure to keep allowing sections like this: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Madonna#Awards_and_achievements and this https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Honors_and_recognition and this https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi#Family_background_and_personal_life for the page all and any of those "super stars". THEY (bill clinton, silvio berlusconi, madonna) HAVE THE RIGHT to have their private life and honors mentioned on Wikipedia of course .... on the one hand the people posting those information on those pages are not to be suspected of working in exchange of money ... and on the other hand please make sure that no potential upcoming contributor to the Gunter Pauli page does dare to create a section containing "Honors_and_recognition" or "Family_background_and_personal_life" (talk) .... IS this your vision on neutrality and objectivity on Wikipedia ??? Please give me the list of criteria to be able to have your early life and honors mentioned ! What is it ??? Being elected president of a country and being an international music celebrity ? Of course Gunter Pauli since you don't know him, can only be a guy who of course hires editors and gives them big 6 digit bank checks to have his page blatantly look like an advertisement poster .... B R A V O !!!Freemanbat 16:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not paid, okay. I already said that. Since it's impossible to prove a negative, I have to accept that. That does not change the other issues with your editing or your combative attitude. If you have no wish to edit further, there is nothing more to be done here, but I hope you change your mind. I want everyone who is willing to be able to participate, but you have to meet us halfway and your unfounded attacks on other editors do not help your case. 331dot (talk) 16:39, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please 331dot you have to understand something of a fundamental importance: there is no such a thing as "do not help your case"! There is no such a thing as "your case"! This is not a criminal court I do not recognise your authority. You have no valid authority anymore once there is abuse of authority! Wikipedia and people in Wikipedia treating me like if I were their subject does exist only in your mind not in my mind ... You are just total random people acting in a platform that can be accessed just by anyone... please stop acting like if you were the teacher at school giving punition for not complying with abuse of authority!! I am not longer interested in having anything to do with this """""encyclopaedia of human knowledge"""" !! Please stop with things like "unfounded attacks"?? Where do you see any "unfounded attack" in everything I have written?? Seriously why do you jump from level 0 to level 10 of hostility by blocking altogether and then expecting me to just be calm and compliant with these people ? Why do you not answer my question asking for a justification (in terms of timing) for blocking me?? I am not interested in having anything to do with wikipedia anymore ! My experience in this website just proved my past sympathy towards wikipedia totally wrong... This website is just mediocre, it keeps talking about objectivity neutrality blablabla but only allows it for some pages and not others .... "your case" .... You wish to see me come back to this platform ... it would be too much honour for you and this “objective" Wikipedia "Encyclopedia for the good and the prosperity of humankind at all" to see me come back Freemanbat (talk) 16:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer 2 simple questions 331dot / user:Blablubbs / GeneralNotability : (1) Why/what in terms of timing justifies blocking Freemanbat ?? (2) Why are these sections allowed to exist in theses pages ??! https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Madonna#Awards_and_achievements https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Honors_and_recognition https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi#Family_background_and_personal_life https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Richard_Branson#Honours_and_awards Freemanbat (talk) 17:05, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure.

Blocks are preventative; you showed a pattern of disruption and you were blocked to end that pattern.
Because those sections are

Adequately sourced
Encyclopaedically relevant
Not written in an unambiguously promotional way
Given due weight relative to the rest of the article

If you want to get unblocked, it may also be helpful if you could explain your relationship to LeonCoulon. Best, Blablubbs|talk 17:20, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Blablubbs

Yes I know LeonCoulon although never met them in real life, I check all what they post as their writings sometimes require proofreading (english not their mother tongue)... they, on the other hand, are better than me at drafting very dry content and staying calm and keeping temper.... and yes we have already interacted outside of Wikipedia as we have met within the frame of our common interest for Gunter Pauli's work, vision and activities if this is what you want to know... Please let me be clear: I am not answering your questions with the hope to be 'unblocked' but because nothing to hide; as mentioned above, I am not interested any longer in contributing to Wikipedia - Peace&Love Baba Freemanbat (talk) 17:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Your case" is a common expression at least where I live, and is not meant to suggest that we are involved in a criminal proceeding. "Case" refers to the argument you are making to unblock you. I also do not have any more authority than anyone else, but the Wikipedia community has entrusted me with certain tools to protect this encyclopedia and make certain determinations. If you don't like the decisions that I or any other administrator make, you have channels available to challenge those decisions(such as requesting unblock). I'm sorry you don't wish to contribute anymore. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, no such a thing as an 'appeal' for me ... unless maybe you try to convince me in real life while having a glass of tea / coffee / hot water / cold water / hot chocolate / cold chocolate / beer / cider / water lemon / lemonade / juice / lassi / lemon tonic / red wine / white wine. Which city do you live in 331dot, User:Blablubbs, GeneralNotability? I travel a lot and will probably end up in one of your cities eventually... Enjoy life ... Peace&Love Baba Freemanbat (talk) 09:28, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I could be including you to my latest question User:Praxidicae Freemanbat (talk) 09:39, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

oh 331dot, User:Blablubbs, GeneralNotability, User:Praxidicae needless to say : my treat (regardless of the beverage! won't judge) Peace&Love Baba Freemanbat (talk) 09:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, User:Blablubbs, GeneralNotability, User:Praxidicae : was your favorite drink not mentioned or .... ? I shall correct that if this is the case! Much love! Freemanbat (talk) 21:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship

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).

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

Request reason:

I am being censored for editing a page that I am passioned about and being accused of being paid to edit the Gunter Pauli page - no matter what I add is being removed and now User:GeneralNotability simply removes altogether any capacity for me to do any sort of edit on wikipedia - I have no interest in editing Boing Boing or the Disney page - I don't like these topics and find no interest in them at all unlike the work and life of Gunter Pauli - Again and again I AM NOT PAID !!!! - and while I acknowledge that some of the content I posted was not formatted suitably for Wikipedia (thanks for the constructive remarks user:Blablubbs, which allowed me to learn from my mistakes), I cannot accept the fact that I am accused of being paid: Similar content that I post on Gunter Pauli's page is to be found in so many many other pages and yet that content is not censored Diana, Princess of Wales Barack Obama Richard Branson ! Are you capable of a discussion with arguments rather than just blocking without any discussion?! at least with other users like user:Blablubbs we are capable of having a normal grown-up discussion that is leading to some common grounds of understanding . Most shockingly, I was blocked by User:GeneralNotability without performing any action on the Gunter Pauli page for days and this blockage came right after I posted this question https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Praxidicae#Gunter_Pauli Freemanbat (talk) 07:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is no "censorship" going on here. Wikipedia has rules and policies to guide its content, just as you have rules about what goes on inside the four walls of your residence. This is not a free speech forum. You aren't paid. Okay. You are still editing in a promotional manner and you seem to be more interested in telling the world about this person's work than in collaborating with others on what an article in this encyclopedia should say. There are places to just tell the world about something or someone if that's what you want to do. If you are interested in working with others to build this encyclopedia of human knowledge, please adjust your attitude to be more collaborative and tell us how you will change your editing going forward. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 3 December 2020 (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.

December 2020

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 why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

331dot (talk) 22:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]