User talk:The Trash Compactor

March 2024[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Helaman. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Bahooka (talk) 03:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Harold B. Lee Library, you may be blocked from editing. Shadow311 (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Family Home Evening. A disproportionate number of your edits have been reverted as disruptive. Please stop. You are extremely close to being blocked. I also note that your edits indicate someone who has been here and is familiar with community policy and guidelines, so you should know better. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:21, 25 March 2024 (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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Daniel Case (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I think I was blocked for removing apologetics from a criticism section in keeping with WP:DUE - [1] :If this is true, I will leave whatever the church responds to criticism with in articles if that is part of our policy

Decline reason:

The fact that your first several edits were AFDs, combined with your use of Wikipedia jargon Delete per nom in your fifth edit, within two hours of registering, makes me suspect that you have another account. Plus, I don't know about the others, but this edit is downright wrong; s:Book of Mormon (1981)/Alma shows no appearances of Helaman between chapters 50 and 53. People can introduce typos by mistake, but when you change obviously correct information to incorrect, and claim that it's correct, you're damaging the encyclopedia. Finally, your unblock rationale completely misconstrues the reasoning, and I don't see any reason to expect that you won't repeat the actions that led to your block. Nyttend (talk) 10:45, 23 April 2024 (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.