User talk:Paulrowland2007
September 2023
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Paulrowland2007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Not aware in this instance that Google Maps is classed as UGC. When the previous content was reverted, I accepted this and thus didn’t undo the removal as I have done in the past. This time the content was reverted without any warning there may be a block - something which in this instance I’d consider unfair. Does this mean that when a block is lifted, a single mistake will result in a re-block - as this is what it seems to be now?
Decline reason:
You've had numerous warnings about WP:RS and have been blocked twice before. Yes, absolutely, if you are unblocked and again violate this policy, you should expect to be immediately reblocked. And you won't be unblocked until you convince an administrator you fully understand our policies around citing using reliable sources. Yamla (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
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.
Paulrowland2007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I understand and will explain why I was blocked, what I will do differently and what contributions I will continue to make. On 30th June 2023 I engaged in edit-warring, where I repeatedly undone a rollback as I thought (at the time) - the edit was justified. Initially the cites were non-extant, then I added some from Facebook. It become very clear, very quickly that this was in breach of the User Generated Content rules and rightly so warranted a block. After this block, I read the rules and understood why this happened. I took a beak from editing Wikipedia articles to prevent any further conflict. This was on the page regarding the new British Rail class 93 locomotive. I am an avid train fan and the community adopted a new nickname for the class; hence the addition to the article. This could have been considered in bad taste and as it hasn’t made it to mainstream channels - I see it isn’t referenced to this day on the article and thus I agree the ban (and reversals) were fully justified. For that I apologise. In my previous edit, regarding the “Sycamore Gap Tree”, I suggested the name is also known as “Sycamore Stump”, following the unfortunate event where it was vandalised. As this was visible on Google Maps, I thought this was enough justification to add the “known as” - because anyone searching the area on Google Maps would see that. My edit was reverted and it was made clear this was also a breach of the UGC rules. This time - I didn’t want to fall into the trap of edit-warring, following my previous ban - I thus didn’t revert the change to look for legitimate citations elsewhere. When I couldn’t find any - I didn’t edit the page further. I actually feel the indefinite ban by HJ Mitchell to be extremely unfair in this case, especially after it was quite some time after my edit was reverted and the edit I made wasn’t malicious in any way (as my previous block regarding the locomotive nickname may have seemed to be). I then submitted an appeal, which was rejected by Yamla, one reason was on the basis I was blocked “twice previously”. This fact is incorrect as the original block was for 1 week by JBW, then without any further action on my part, was reduced to 48 hours, again by JBW. I can only assume the week long ban was in error and thus corrected to 48 hours. So I would consider these 2 blocks to be one. I will try my utmost best to ensure that all further edits are within guidelines and should something be rolled back - I won’t get into the edit-warring I previously did. We all make mistakes and I think an instant block for a legitimate mistake this time is extremely harsh. I currently volunteer at a few charities and often will be called to make edits to their Wikipedia pages when updates are called for (I.e the heritage railway I volunteer at may inherit a new locomotive). Information like this is factually correct and is to be made public knowledge through sources such as Wikipedia and the railway’s own website etc. I sincerely promise to respect the rules, will ensure that all edits are legitimate and appropriately cited and if in doubt - will seek the advice of administrators etc. Thank you for your understanding. Paulrowland2007 (talk) 14:59, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
No response to query below about COI policy in almost two weeks. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:11, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- I can confirm that the two block log entries from me were just one block. I decided that blocking for a week was unnecessarily long, so I reduced it to 2 days. Thus, although a quick glance at the block log gives the impression of two previous blocks, that impression is misleading, and it was in fact just one previousblock. JBW (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Just noting that you don't need to specifically seek out administrators- administrators have no more authority than any other editor, just extra tools that would be irresponsible for the entire community to possess. You may ask any experienced editor for help. If you intend to edit about charities for which you volunteer, will you read and comply with the conflict of interest policy? 331dot (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:11, 30 September 2023 (UTC)