User talk:Core2012

2478:, at which point your behavior will be reviewed and the community will decide whether the topic ban is necessary. This topic ban is indefinite, so it will not expire until it is lifted by agreement of the community. Read all of the advice that 331dot, only, Julietdeltalima, and everyone else has given you above. Find an area completely unrelated to these topics and go edit there. If you start trying to evade this topic ban or start wikilawyering about how the article you're editing isn't 2092:

administrative action. Regarding the "legal term", your note is a content question that isn't really relevant to your block appeal, but every time you make it you're digging yourself into a bit more of a hole. According to the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, "illegal alien" and "illegal immigrant" are indeed used in immigration law, but collectively constitute only 46% of the legal usage; an additional 46% of the legal usage is "unauthorized alien" and "undocumented alien". (

3723:

be unblocked and have no topic ban whatsoever. The only way I can prove I have changed is to have the ability to engage in talk discussions on those topic articles to prove I will refrain from disruptive editing from now on. I also apologize to Yamla for attacks against you that were clearly out of line. After reading your talk page it is clear to me you are simply passionate about your role, as am I, and not personally targeting me.Core2012 21:40, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

2749: 1697: 1609: 129: 1294: 1235: 1580: 22: 1362:. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. 991: 2374: 3797: 3637: 3099: 2146: 1901: 1488: 3493: 3019: 2347:. If you can demonstrate several months of contention-free edits, you could then apply to have your topic ban lifted. You are free to plead your case that you should be unblocked without a topic ban, but based on your unwillingness to accept that your edits have been problematic, I have to warn you that it is unlikely to succeed. Remember, you have no free speech here; see 2720: 1386: 28: 946: 624: 455: 379: 578: 2046:

outside of Knowledge, it's disruptive on Knowledge. This is so even if you seek consensus for each edit before making the edit in mainspace; if you are here for just one issue or one viewpoint, and others aren't, you're going to utterly tire them out from discussing this issue and it's going to be disruptive to our editorial processes. That's why

3559:. Don't waste your time trying to negotiate terms for your unblock or removal of your topic ban - they're not going to happen and frankly all they've done is annoy everyone dealing with you (especially considering that you previously agreed to a limitation and then did nothing except violate that limitation). 2513:

I agree with 331dot's thinking for a potential topic ban. That being said, your going kicking and screaming into an agreement for a topic ban isn't inspiring much confidence to me. What are the "numerous productive and non-controversial edits" you have in mind? This can help us assess your ability

2252:

state. There are places to advocate for your viewpoint, this isn't one of them. I agree that a topic ban is needed (which you can appeal after a time, it is not permanent) so you can demonstrate with contributions in other areas that you can work collaboratively and use independent reliable sources

255:

for example. Some editors who are 50 or 60 year old university professors with five years experience and 50,000 edits sometimes might even fail to become admins. I would suggest checking out the links on the welcome message I'm shortly going to post here, and if you really want to know

3612:

Following your statements in the above UTRS appeal, and discussion among several administrators, I have restored talk page access to allow you to post an unblock request here. As you were told at UTRS, any unblock is likely to be on the basis of your accepting that the topic ban can't be appealed in

2973:

Of the six edits you've made since your block was lifted, five were in violation of your topic ban. You are exceedingly lucky that L235 saw this before I did. Had I noticed this first, I'd have blocked you immediately. Your topic ban was unappealable for at least six months; you should consider that

2454:

I have taken the time to reflect on my behavior here recently. I agree my edits have been an issue and I wish to discuss a very limited potential topic ban. My only desire is to do whatever it takes to get my block removed ASAP and if a topic ban is unavoidable to have it as limited as possible and

3722:

I want to apologize for my edits last year and for taking block discussions so personally. I learned a lot during my block period about the need for consensus on even trivial issues. I have been surprised by the lack of diversity of views on some of these article talk pages also. I would ask that I

3882:

I am requesting I be unblocked so that I may begin making constructive edits that are not relevant to politics or race. As has been previously stated the only way to prove I can be constructive is by making germane edits and by engaging in talk page discussions if an edit is in active debate. I am

3480:

If anyone except Yamla would tell me how to file a complaint against her, please tell me ASAP. She has convinced me she should no longer be allowed to take actions against me. Frankly, her actions thus far should be reviewed for bias. She has been rude since the beginning and I’ve noticed other

3200:

applies. As noted below, you were blocked for violating your topic ban on an article, not a talk page, though you also repeatedly violated your topic ban on the talk pages, too. I agree with 331dot, L235 and GeneralNotability, below, you've caused others to waste a huge amount of time dealing with

2626:

I am an uninvolved admin here, I am willing to unblock you on the condition that you accept a topic ban from race and American politics. This topic ban could be appealed starting six months after your unblock, but would remain in force until successfully appealed. I need a yes or no: do you accept

3271:

Not only is this unblock request false (the user was explicitly blocked for a non-talk page edit) and the user bordering on CIR concerns it's clear to me at this point that this user has failed to understand the gigantic waste of time they have caused. I recommend that the reviewing administrator

2231:

I apologize for my controversial edits and agree that I will consult the talk page any time I wish to make similar edits in the future. I should be allowed to make edits again because I will not make the same kinds of edits again without engaging in discussion first and if there is no agreement I

3734:

This is a disappointing departure from your proposed unblock narrative on UTRS. Any request to have your topic ban removed is a non-starter; prove you can edit constructively on other topics again first. It would be helpful to explain "surprised by the lack of diversity of views on some of these

2045:

Hi Core2012. I think it may be helpful to clarify why I blocked. Essentially, I blocked your account because the purpose of your editing is to push pages closer to your ideological perspective (rather than to improve the encyclopedia as a whole). While this is a perfectly legitimate thing to do

2342:

As multiple people have explained to you, you've demonstrated you are not capable of editing without causing problems. You are free to make one more unblock request, but given that multiple people have told you that you are unlikely to be unblocked without a topic ban, I strongly suggest you

2302:

I edit-conflicted in declining this request, but my reason was pretty much identical to 331dot's, and I also would not support an unconditional unblock. If you edit collaboratively elsewhere and show no sign of promoting any ideological perspective in your edits (and whether you are doing so

3894:

I see that GeneralNotability unblocked you with an understanding that you would adhere to a topic ban, you did not. I see that JBW unblocked you based on your claim on UTRS that you would accept the topic ban, you immediately made an unblock request asking to be unblocked with "no topic ban

545:

of the previous schedules (for this century, at least), in all likelihood because the scheduling of games is sporadic and is usually attributed to afternoon games, and definitively because it is not attributed to the regular schedule the way football is, and as such is not sourced as being

2091:

This will be my last post here unless my participation is requested by a reviewing administrator. I apologize for declaring your intention; rather, what I mean is that it is apparent to me that that is your intention, and as a Knowledge administrator I have to make that call when taking

1986:

I have now realized the importance of collaborative consensus on this website and if I wish to make similar edits in the future I will consult the talk page rather than simply edit without discussion. I was simply trying to keep articles neutral but I should’ve used discussion first.

2642:

How does this get enforced and why is politics included? Race has been the primary issue here. Also would you be willing to make the ban be until January 1 2021? It’s not 6 months but it’s a more neutral date. Start fresh in a new year. Core2012 23:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

3205:

probably still applies. That requires six months with zero edits. But given your complete lack of insight into the problems you are causing, I have serious doubts you'll be successful under WP:SO. Note that if you are successful, the topic ban would remain in effect once unblocked.

3184:

I apologize for making edits to talk pages. I was unaware that this was a violation I thought the talk pages didn’t count as they are intended for discussion which I engaged in. If unblocked I will no longer use even talk pages for 6 months. Core2012 18:11, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

1998:

This is not convincing. You've been editing here for years, you knew this already. Frankly, I wouldn't support an unblock without you agreeing to a topic ban around race and American politics, broadly construed. Other administrators may well have a different opinion, however.

763:

That'll do just fine for a source. I had to remove it from the schedule, as nothing on there places it at a date or time, but I did add it (and Wipeout, incidentally) to the returning series section. I usually look for more official information in the press releases at

3201:

your disruptive editing. You were given a second chance and blew it. Not just a little bit, you comprehensively violated your topic ban, you showed you never had the slightest intention of abiding by it. Frankly, you are done here. Knowledge isn't the place for you.

444:

I know because there are every year, in fact usually there's more but I figure it looks bad with that many TBA listed that many times. Just look back to last year's finale. The finales are always the biggest, best, and most watched Idol event each season.

2108:

has shifted away from "illegal immigrant". In any event, none of that is the reason for your block; the reason for your block, as I said, is that your pattern of editing advances only one ideological position and that is not a good fit for Knowledge. Best,

2040:

I am literally agreeing to discuss edits I wish to make before making them on articles in those topics. That solves the issue of problematic edits because if there isn’t a clear consensus I will not make the edit. Core2012 23:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

603:

located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you.

199:

I am sorry about this, and I hope you don't take it personally. If you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I am confident that you would be able to submit a successful RfA in the future. You may wish to consider applying for

2086:

It is also very inappropriate to state what you think the purpose of my edits are in a way that implies your opinion is indisputable because you do not know my intentions. Only I have the right to say that. Core2012 23:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

2253:

instead of your personal viewpoint. I too do not think you will find an administrator willing to unblock you without a topic ban(I stress it would not necessarily be permanent), but one is free to do so if they wish. I am declining your request.

3937:

Then why exactly was I specifically told to use the SO? I did not previously understand how broad the ban was and did not realize it was ANY edit in those topics regardless of what the article is about. Core2012 01:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

2082:

By using the term illegal immigrants I am making those articles reflect legal terms rather than politically motivated ones. The Supreme Court as well as federal laws use illegal and not undocumented. Core2012 23:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

3303:

I won't review this either since I implemented the TBAN, but concur with 331dot. I told you what a topic ban means, and L235 laid it out quite clearly above (including, in fact, "discussing on talk pages"). You've had plenty of chances.

911:

The Bill is not signed. Therefore, it is still PENDING. Thegreyanomaly (the bill has NOT been signed yet). A person updated the map and it was CHANGED BACK because the bill has NOT been signed yet. Therefore, I am changing it back.

1778:. You have a history of using misleading edit summaries, such as "Fixed typo" or "Fixed grammar", to railroad through changes that reflect a pattern of plain ideological agenda. Here are some of the common edits you've made: 883:

The Governor did not sign the bill. Therefore, the bill is not a law. He has not signed it. Therefore, no action has been taking on the bill. It was Transmitted to Governor 06/29/2011. Please do not change the page again.

2455:

lifted without exceptions ASAP as well. I already have numerous productive and non-controversial edits in mind for pages on unrelated topics and I would like to be able to make those edits to start proving my value here.

1773:

Hi Core2012. Essentially every one of your edits has reflected a history of tendentious editing, to the extent that it seems like the purpose of your being here is not to build an encyclopedia but rather to engage in

790:

Thank God, because I was gonna just give up, though I never would do that. I don't see why it can't just be assumed that it will air at the same timeslot, considering it has EVERY single episode and season so far?

1193:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 1138:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 528: 191:

prematurely. Simply put, you only have 76 edits on Knowledge; while your edit count isn't the only determining factor, and numerous people have their own personal standards by which they judge RfA candidates,

2756:

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

2243:

I have examined your edit history and some specific edits, and it seems to me that you are here to push a conservative or Republican viewpoint instead of working collaboratively with others to arrive at a

3452:

is still available to you even though you are blocked. Be warned, multiple administrators have already weighed in here, so it's unlikely any formal complaint against any one of those admins would go far;

3461:. That's not a threat at all, mind you. I'm not part of ArbCom and would expect it's unlikely they'd impose additional sanctions, except perhaps to set a time frame around future unblock requests. -- 2232:

will not make the edit. I am making this request because my previous one was denied with the admin making unreasonable demands as conditions for unblocking so I request different admins this time.

3357:

We are not responsible for what you see or don't see. You are responsible for fully understanding what you agree to. I think the Standard Offer is your only pathway back to editing at this point.

2338:

All I want to do is be unblocked. I shouldn’t have to agree to censorship for that to happen. I am agreeing to reach consensus for controversial edits. Core2012 21:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

3407:

No, the ban will still be in effect and must be appealed separately, after you have demonstrated that you can abide by it and make other contributions. You're not going to get such a guarantee.

3627:

I have made a formal unblock request which still has not been addressed after several days now. It is posted as a new topic discussion on this talk page. Core2012 22:51, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

2474:. That is two separate topics, by the way: "race" is one, "American politics" is the other. Please take the time to read up on what those mean. Six months from today, you may make an appeal at 716:

Ask yourself, Core2012; who are you to me or anyone else on Knowledge that we can take your word that you know or have met John Quinones? If I told you that I had a personal relationship with

1825:

I strongly disagree with your characterization of my edits. There is no reason to capitalize black, and illegal immigrant is the correct legal term. Core2012 08:26, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

2708:

Yamla needs to be banned from actions against me. She is no longer capable of being neutral and is now being confrontational against site policies. Core2012 18:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

1402: 1275: 1268: 1260: 1256: 3895:

whatsoever". It seems you say things to get an unblock and then don't do it. I am declining this unblock request because I think if I take your word I will be made to feel foolish.

639: 459: 251::Hi Core. Stick around, because there's an awful lot you still need to learn about contributing to Knowledge before you can even consider being an admin - filling in 2681:

There’s no reason to be demanding I’ve been nothing but nice. I accept because since apparently there’s no other way to get unblocked. Core2012 23:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

2599:. If your reaction is, "I don't care about that crap," have fun explaining that to our fine Slovenian colleagues, and please go back to your pre-Wikipedian endeavors. Thanks. - 1324: 42:. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Knowledge: 4021:

With the user indeffed, I've removed the TBANs from the conditional unblock editing restrictions. Should an appeal be made in the future, a new TBAN will have to be provided.

504: 1584: 1556: 1390: 35: 2050:

proposes a topic ban from race and American politics: that will give you an opportunity to show that you can improve the encyclopedia more broadly. Hopefully this helps,

3252:

I won't review this, since I was involved with your earlier block review. But you were told on October 29th above "Unless clearly and unambiguously specified otherwise,

2691:

If an editor sees you violating the topic ban, they can report it to the administrators' noticeboard. If an admin sees you violating the topic ban, they can block you.

2974:

timer reset; you can not appeal your topic ban until 2021-03-01. You won't get another chance. Any further violations and I will impose an indefinite block on you. --

2622:

I plan on some edits to articles related to the 2020 US TV primetime schedule and updating names of shows and other items. Core2012 02:37, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

2498:

It's up to the reviewing admin, but my suggestion would be a topic ban from race and American politics, broadly construed, which you could appeal after 6 months.

2991:

Yamla, I propose a ban against you on any further action against me. You have proven you are no longer a neutral admin. Core2012 17:59, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

1495:; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to 1018:

if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see

3930:

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.

3773:

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.

3240:

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.

2287:

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.

2033:

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.

1283: 508: 1014:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 4005:

You were not unconditionally promised or guaranteed that such a thing would occur. Since there is nothing more to do here, I am removing talk page access.

3883:

willing to agree to a topic ban as long as it only applies to edits about race and politics, and if it is only temporary.Core2012 00:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

2662:

That is not true. I am allowed to make a counter offer first. You have been hostile to me the entire time Yamla. Core2012 23:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

2571:

want to make this a better open-source encyclopedia, show us that you're cool with spending an hour on a nice Sunday afternoon copy-editing articles like

1793:

edits. After the expiration of this block, I strongly suggest that you shift your focus; I anticipate that any further block will be indefinite. Best,

209: 188: 3555:

for six months, then submit a request via UTRS after the six month mark to get talk page access back in order to make an unblock request under the

3374:

What is that offer? Yamla is the only one who suggested anything and obviously she can’t be trusted anymore. Core2012 20:21, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

3527: 77: 3547:

You clearly are not understanding how blocks or topic bans work and every attempt to explain them to you has apparently had no effect. While you

3351:

Ok well I didn’t see that so I deserve another chance especially with yamla being so unbelievably rude. Core2012 20:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

1538: 928: 900: 632: 1286:. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. 3837: 3677: 3139: 2409: 2186: 1941: 859:(~~~~) to the end of your comments automatically adds your name and stamps the time so people know who you are when you're talking to them. 3401:

That’s literally what I was doing anyway. But I need a guarantee of no bans at all after that time. Core2012 20:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

2303:

intentionally or not, your edits do come across that way), then an appeal against a topic ban could be reviewed a few months down the line.

2596: 1529:

to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an

1218: 1163: 949:

Welcome to Knowledge. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article

458:

Welcome to Knowledge. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article

2591:, that's not helpful to this project. Gut it up and hit the "Random article" button in the left sidebar and show this community that you 3915: 3758: 3522: 3225: 3043: 2272: 2018: 1725: 1656: 1343: 142: 3256:, as well as the parts of other pages that are related to the topic, as encapsulated in the phrase "broadly construed""(my emphasis). 2369:

How many months would a topic ban last? And I wish for someone other than Yamla to respond. Core2012 23:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

2882: 3457:

generally applies here. However, ARBCOM is an avenue of final appeal. Be aware, they may impose additional sanctions upon you; see

2684:

I also need to know that a neutral arbiter will review my ban appeal when that time comes. Core2012 23:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

600: 2748: 599: 2835:, but to allow them to edit the rest of Knowledge. Unless clearly and unambiguously specified otherwise, a topic ban covers all 2647:

So, to be clear, you are unwilling to accept the option offered you by GeneralNotability, who asked you a yes or no question? --

3983:

I highly doubt you were promised that unconditionally. ArbCom is your last avenue of appeal, there is nothing more to do here.

3941:

I need an answer please. How do I get unblocked if no one is willing to accept the request? Core2012 20:28, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

2366:

Yamla I did accept that my edits have been problematic. You seem to be missing this. Core2012 05:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

2096:) But in fact none of that is important, because we do not use the "legal terms" in our articles. We use language reflected in 1448:. You have also been reverted three times. Do not do it a fourth time. His race is 100% relevant to the story. Your editing is 1279: 1214: 1159: 689: 382:

Welcome to Knowledge. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, please cite a

516: 512: 3832: 3672: 3134: 2924: 2728: 2404: 2181: 1936: 1637: 1552: 1398: 1351: 807: 537:

will be on the schedule when you say, or stop introducing it, especially when the ABC upfront doesn't even currently include

533: 500: 293: 39: 2847:". For example, if an editor is banned from the topic "weather", this editor is forbidden from editing not only the article 2308: 1714: 314: 66: 3424:

Is there a way to file a formal complaint of bias or intimidation against an admin? Core2012 16:12, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

2093: 3511: 2832: 1645: 1534: 1500: 319: 310: 204:

for feedback on how to obtain the necessary experience. Once you are ready to request adminship again, there is a great

56: 1205:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

1150:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

1002: 3964:

And clearly that didn't matter. You could try appealing to ArbCom, other than that, there is nothing more to do here.

3564: 3536: 3309: 2844: 2696: 2632: 2487: 2471: 1649: 1331: 1314: 1210: 1155: 1006:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 128: 80:

on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

3430:

You're blocked, you can't edit anywhere but this talk page. You've convinced me that an unblock would be a bad idea.

2321:

I will add that each admin can only review one of your requests, so it is not necessary to ask for different admins.

855:. Like any good reporter. Like John Quinones. Oh, and by the way, you really should sign your posts; adding four 3809:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

3649:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

3294: 3111:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

3080: 2997:

While blocked, you only have access to this page to request unblock, not to pursue grievances against other users.

2963: 2158:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

2131: 2072: 1913:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

1815: 1762: 1413:, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use 1347: 1264: 1019: 954: 924: 896: 685: 463: 383: 2888:

weather-related parts of other pages, even if the pages as a whole have little or nothing to do with weather: the

2687:

I obviously don’t plan to violate the ban but how exactly is it enforced? Core2012 01:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

3810: 3650: 3506: 3501: 3112: 3032: 3027: 2608: 2159: 1914: 1705: 1617: 1544: 1359: 329: 261: 135: 3804: 3644: 3106: 2806: 2381: 2304: 2153: 1908: 1355: 962: 647: 643: 471: 391: 323: 205: 3979:

Someone needs to give me another chance since that’s what I was promised Core2012 21:24, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

215:

If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck!

3598: 2864: 2104:. While this is an ongoing debate, your position is not the only correct one; for instance, the influential 1596: 1476: 1334:

is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means

958: 646:, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at 628: 467: 387: 201: 920: 892: 3851: 3691: 3560: 3532: 3305: 3153: 2793: 2692: 2628: 2576: 2557: 2483: 2423: 2200: 1955: 1718: 1630: 1626: 1588: 1564: 1530: 1492: 1339: 966: 475: 395: 300: 289: 252: 51: 46: 3998:

I was promised that if I agree to a topic ban I would be unblocked. Core2012 02:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

2941:. Please note that further violations of this restriction will trigger further enforcement action. Best, 2514:

to contribute to the project to weigh against your past edits that suggest you weren't here to improve.

2141:

Kevin, what can I do to be unblocked without agreeing to any ban? Core2012 01:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

4026: 3436: 2831:

The purpose of a topic ban is to forbid editors from making edits related to a certain topic area where

1775: 1423: 1371: 974: 435: 344: 336: 84: 2563:

Here's the big ol' litmus test: If you just now read that and felt yourself getting all tetchy because

3326:

I was not specifically told talk pages. Pages means articles. Core2012 19:55, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

1583:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at

2792:) were a violation of your topic bans from race and American politics, broadly construed, imposed by 2732: 2601: 2580: 2565:

those things are not important compared to my political thoughts as an American in mid-September 2020

1784:

De-capitalizing "Black" and removing the race of individuals (including edit-warring to achieve this)

916: 888: 865: 795: 778: 745: 739:. Provide some evidence, or just accept that you know more than everyone else does, and walk away. 703: 656: 610: 590: 586: 564: 484: 340: 110: 1555:. Further reverts without engaging in the discussion are disruptive and may result in an report at 3458: 2731:

and Knowledge pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to

2245: 1641: 1507:, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. 1504: 1496: 1206: 1151: 582: 352: 88: 73: 3897: 3782: 3587: 3321:

Just ban me for 6 months and then give me a final chance. Core2012 18:39, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

2814: 1592: 1472: 1457: 1338:

administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the

1335: 1106: 847:

until they announce their intentions. That's why it's not an assumption policy (Wiki calls that

305: 296:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 246: 175: 4001:

Someone needs to give me another chance like I was promised Core2012 06:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

1409:

that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an

3481:

instances where she is also rude to others for no reason. Core2012 18:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

2899:

discussions or suggestions about weather-related topics anywhere on Knowledge, for instance, a

765: 351:(~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out 2908: 2724: 2572: 2105: 1838: 1789:

Other than edits that contribute to a pattern of tendentious editing, you've made essentially

1560: 1414: 1410: 1406: 1182: 1173: 1127: 1118: 1085: 1072: 950: 404: 368: 356: 269: 3960:

Except I was told I would be unblocked with a topic ban. Core2012 15:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

4022: 4010: 3988: 3969: 3924: 3767: 3449: 3431: 3412: 3389: 3362: 3339: 3261: 3234: 3049: 3002: 2875: 2671: 2553: 2503: 2326: 2281: 2258: 2027: 1731: 1662: 1418: 1366: 1299:

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect.

1241:

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect.

1202: 1186: 1147: 1131: 1011: 990: 970: 420: 193: 155: 1201:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1146:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1035:, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a 3466: 3211: 2979: 2938: 2871: 2652: 2545: 2482:

covered by these, you will be blocked again, and don't expect to come back from that one.

2356: 2004: 1696: 1608: 1526: 1394: 1068: 1038: 860: 773: 740: 698: 651: 605: 559: 479: 257: 236: 105: 95: 1436:

In this past week, you have tried to remove Arbery's race from the article three times,

541:

as one of the renewed shows for 2011–12. And as for the baseball, it is not included on

3741: 3454: 3288: 3074: 2957: 2797: 2519: 2467: 2348: 2344: 2125: 2066: 1888: 1857: 1809: 1756: 1198: 1190: 1143: 1135: 1015: 736: 21: 1293: 1234: 87:! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult 3815: 3655: 3618: 3197: 3117: 2904: 2900: 2746:

With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button

2588: 2541: 2387: 2297: 2164: 1919: 1884: 1873: 1868:

How would I be able to get the block removed? Core2012 15:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

1853: 1834: 1679: 1453: 1194: 1139: 1101: 1032: 852: 799: 732: 496: 159: 61: 38:, Core2012. I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for 2923:

A list of currently active editing restrictions (including topic bans) can be found

1046:

I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.

3556: 3381: 3202: 2916: 2912: 2475: 2249: 1842: 1830: 1449: 1081: 1007: 848: 675: 401: 364: 265: 1255:. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called 597:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 1551:

There is an ongoing discussion on the article's Talk Page. You can join it here

4006: 3984: 3965: 3408: 3385: 3358: 3335: 3257: 2998: 2667: 2584: 2549: 2499: 2322: 2254: 2097: 724: 2896:, for example, is covered by the topic ban, but the rest of the article is not; 2583:

and making them un-embarrassing when, someday, they get randomly brought up by

3946: 3462: 3207: 2975: 2893: 2889: 2648: 2352: 2047: 2000: 720: 217: 3254:

a topic ban covers all pages (not only articles) broadly related to the topic

3736: 3581: 3282: 3274: 3068: 3060: 2951: 2943: 2856: 2515: 2119: 2111: 2060: 2052: 1803: 1795: 1750: 1742: 3492: 3018: 3614: 3521:

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the

3042:

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the

2764: 1878: 1847: 1724:

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the

1673: 1655:

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the

1318: 1252: 264:

where you will also find some more interesting links. Best wishes, --

3046:, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: 2719: 1728:, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: 1659:, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: 1515:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;

1385: 2848: 2761:

Please sign all of your talk page posts with four tildes, ~~~~. Thanks.

650:

and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.

27: 4030: 4014: 3992: 3973: 3954: 3905: 3790: 3748: 3622: 3606: 3568: 3540: 3470: 3439: 3416: 3393: 3366: 3343: 3313: 3298: 3265: 3215: 3084: 3006: 2983: 2967: 2773: 2700: 2675: 2656: 2636: 2614: 2523: 2507: 2491: 2360: 2330: 2312: 2262: 2135: 2076: 2008: 1893: 1862: 1819: 1766: 1684: 1568: 1480: 1461: 1426: 1374: 1222: 1167: 1112: 1089: 978: 932: 904: 872: 811: 785: 752: 710: 693: 663: 617: 571: 491: 439: 409: 398:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —

372: 273: 239: 177: 117: 856: 2589:

be the political defender of whatever you characterize your cause as

2740: 969:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

594: 478:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

348: 3780:

Please wait while I look into the events surrounding your block.

2851:, but also everything else that has to do with weather, such as: 2839:(not only articles) broadly related to the topic, as well as the 1189:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge

1134:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge

3036:

from editing for violating your topic ban from American politics

2860: 2666:

This is not a negotiation. Do you accept the offer, yes or no?

2567:, this isn't a good fit for a volunteer project for you. If you 1305:

imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

1247:

imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

957:

for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of

466:

for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of

419:

How do you know there will be six performances in the finale? —

386:

for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of

1107: 1053:

the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click

831:. Or maybe use it to fill the gap on Wednesdays or Sundays if 25:

Sorry for the belated welcome, but the cookies are still warm!

2843:

that are related to the topic, as encapsulated in the phrase "

1525:

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's

2587:

for some currently unforeseeable reason. If you only want to

1067:

If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off

3795: 3635: 3491: 3097: 3017: 2372: 2144: 1899: 1695: 1607: 989: 145:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

127: 1829:

Based on this, I have extended the block to indefinite per

1644:. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek 585:

and Knowledge pages that have open discussion, such as on

3912:

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please

3755:

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please

3585:. Admins familiar with this case are invited to opine. -- 3514:. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has 3222:

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please

2269:

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please

2015:

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please

1043:

template, along with your question, beneath this message.

984:

Orphaned non-free image File:American Idol Title Card.png

3932:

Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

3775:

Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

3242:

Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

2289:

Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

2035:

Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

1781:

Changing "undocumented immigrant" to "illegal immigrant"

1587:

regarding a possible violation of Knowledge's policy on

581:

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to

3865: 3861: 3855: 3846: 3842: 3828: 3824: 3820: 3705: 3701: 3695: 3686: 3682: 3668: 3664: 3660: 3167: 3163: 3157: 3148: 3144: 3130: 3126: 3122: 3037: 2874:

such as all of the categories that are associated with

2822: 2790: 2788: 2786: 2784: 2437: 2433: 2427: 2418: 2414: 2400: 2396: 2392: 2214: 2210: 2204: 2195: 2191: 2177: 2173: 2169: 1969: 1965: 1959: 1950: 1946: 1932: 1928: 1924: 1468: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1403:

List of rallies and protest marches in Washington, D.C.

1054: 1323:

The specific details of these sanctions are described

194:

this particular RfA was all but assured of not passing

1648:, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request 3803: