User talk:Palscout

Welcome!

Hello, Palscout, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Council on American–Islamic Relations, have removed content without an explanation. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can place {{helpme}} on your talk page along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorial
Article wizard for creating new articles
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Amortias (T)(C) 05:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Council on American–Islamic Relations, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Amortias (T)(C) 06:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Council on American–Islamic Relations, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Amortias (T)(C) 06:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Council on American–Islamic Relations. Amortias (T)(C) 06:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible conflict of interest

Hello, Palscout. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 22:33, 24 June 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia and still navigating this and figuring out how to make legitimate edits to pages that are abusive and Islamophobic

Decline reason:

Great. So now that you know your edits were inappropriate, can you please explain specifically how you will edit differently if we unblocked you? Yamla (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2016 (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.

Decline reason follow up

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).

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

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia and still navigating this and figuring out how to make legitimate edits to pages that are abusive and Islamophobic. First, I would like to apologize if I did not follow the proper rules in my attempt to edit and fix errors. This is all very confusing and I will learn how to use Wikipedia before further editing. I will also utilize the Talk section instead of just removing things that are inaccurate or that cite unreliable sources. Lastly, I will use the helpme tag frequently.

Decline reason:

I think you'll find it very, very difficult to argue that The New York Times or Newsweek are unreliable sources. Huon (talk) 11:32, 26 June 2016 (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.

Request reason: I am new to Wikipedia and still navigating this and figuring out how to make legitimate edits to pages that are abusive and Islamophobic

Decline reason: Great. So now that you know your edits were inappropriate, can you please explain specifically how you will edit differently if we unblocked you? Yamla (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Follow-up response: First, I would like to apologize if I did not follow the proper rules in my attempt to edit and fix errors. This is all very confusing and I will learn how to use Wikipedia before further editing. I will also utilize the Talk section instead of just removing things that are inaccurate or that cite unreliable sources. Lastly, I will use the helpme tag frequently.

Follow up to Huon

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).

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

Request reason:

I am referring to the anti-Muslim blogs and groups and individuals like the Clarion Project, investigativeproject.org, and Steven Emerson. Also, some of the Fox News articles are very slanted/biased and require additional information from other, more balanced sources to present the full picture.

Decline reason:

In this edit you remove information sourced to the New York Times. Care to explain? PhilKnight (talk) 16:59, 30 June 2016 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

As I mentioned previously, I am new to Wikipedia and still navigating this and figuring out how to make legitimate edits to pages that are abusive and Islamophobic. The quote from the New York Times articles was taken out of context and it required more information. For example, that same article states that the largest American Muslim organization was named to the list but there is no mention of that in the Wikipedia paragraph quoting the New York Times article. The page was created as an attack page and is framed negatively with biased quotes and citations without presenting the full picture. My edits attempted to provide balance, not erase entire sections.

Decline reason:

Fundamentally, Wikipedia is a neutral point of view and is not censored. That means occasionally there will be content you don't like, or content you do like will be removed when it conflicts with the aim of writing an encyclopedia. I am turning your talk page access off as you don't seem to understand the reason for the block and have had too many declined requests. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:29, 1 July 2016 (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.