User talk:TranscendentMe

Edit War is bilateral. Leaving a message on my page doesn't justify your position. I will probably do the same. Instead, go open a section in talk instead of here[edit]

Request for unblock[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I believe I was blocked due to my attempt to provide a balanced description on Wiki doesn't fit into the satisfaction of a few editors, the administrator that blocked me holds a strong judgment based on what s/he believe as well. WP: NPOV encourage to indicate the relative prominence of opposing views and I have an extensive discussion why this unpopular side should be included rather than only one-sided selective reference on Wiki in these talk pages: CCTV_as_a_source[1] and POV_edit[2]. These pages in Australia–China_relations were edited in a way that has a disproportional defense for Austalia with plenty of details but omitting the response from the China side. I believe in general I provided sufficient reason for editing and reference when I added a balanced counterpart description in the previous editing, those editors that have disputes with me also have a rich history of edit warring and a tendency to abuse reporting their dissenters which should be considered.TranscendentMe (talk) 02:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Based on your edits, I concur with the reason for the block, and see no reason to lift it based on this request. I would only endorse lifting it if you agreed to a topic ban from Australia-China relations topics, but that will be up to the next administrator. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2021 (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[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Zhao Lijian‎; 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 collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages, as you did to Zhao Lijian‎. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Internet censorship in China, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Australia–China relations, you may be blocked from editing. Please seek consensus first before adding materials in the Morrison Government section. You are completely ignoring the suggestions on the talk page. Normchou ^💬 20:17, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:TranscendentMe reported by User:Normchou (Result: ). Thank you. Normchou ^💬 20:24, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Australia–China relations; 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 collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 ~~~~}}. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:06, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The ANI report is located here. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]