User talk:Voyt13

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Voyt13, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --John (talk) 23:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Can you add sources for anything you add here? --John (talk) 23:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash[edit]

Hello. I have removed your edits to the article on the 2010 crash because I cannot verify the reliability of the sources presented. I understand there is some sort of parliamentary investigation that was undertaken which determined two explosions of unknown origin brought down the plane. However, machine translation only goes so far when verifying sources. We have a policy which says "exceptional claims require exceptional sources". In this case, we have two accident reports from Poland and Russia which say the crash was an accident, caused by pilot error. Your edits speak of three experts and some sort of parliamentary committee which determined an explosion caused the crash, and which included testimony conducted in Brussels. Perhaps you can help explain what these sources say, who wrote them, and what credibility they have. This will help us determine what of this information is notable and where and how it should be included in the article. You can do this on the talk page of the article. Thanks and I look forward to collaborating with you to improve Wikipedia's article. N419 BH 06:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case[edit]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robert Warren for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. noclador (talk) 16:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Personal attacks[edit]

This edit is completely unacceptable, and assumes no WP:Good faith in the intentions of other editors. Do not make these sorts of comments again, or you may be blocked without further warning. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 22:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum; I've just seen you've been accused of being a sockpuppet. Truly, it's better to just deny these allegations, with supporting facts (or by allowing a checkuser to be run on you to clear your name, in extreme cases) without questioning others' motives. It just becomes a vicious spiral of insults. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 22:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I will not add the information; this is in line with WP:ARBEE, WP:FRINGE, and WP:UNDUE. Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 07:55, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012[edit]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 01:40, 5 September 2012 (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).

Voyt13 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1. There are insufficient reasons to block me 2. There is unequal treatment of users. User noclador could falsely accuse me of Sockpuppetry and call me a "part of this sock circus" and he was not blocked. I expressed an opinion about him on another user's page and I was blocked. The accusation and the blocking looks like an attack on a person presenting other views in a discussion on an article 3. I understand that the opinion I stated was controversial and emotional and I accept that such statements are forbidden on Wikipedia 4. There are important discussions on articles taking place right now. I participated in them and I would like to continue.

Decline reason:

Highly offensive comments such as this are more than enough reason to block any user. Allegations of sockpuppetry, when made in good faith, are not attacks; there was sufficient evidence to merit an investigation, even if the allegations (in your case) did not turn out to be correct. Further, your appeals need to address your actions, which only point 3 does - point 1 I've addressed as invalid, point 2 discusses other user's conduct, and point 4 is not a valid reason for unblocking. Those discussions will likely still be there in three days. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 21:51, 5 September 2012 (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.

November 2012[edit]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Immediately after 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash became unprotected, you immediately changed the contents to your prefered version despite a clear lack of consensus on the article's talk page. Once you are unblocked, you may return to the talk page and continue discussions. If you feel like you're not able to reach consensus with currently involved editors, follow dispute resolution to bring in outside help. But what you cannot do is simply try to force your version into the article. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 Crash, you may be blocked from editing. N419 BH 20:34, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. N419 BH 20:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for not being here to improve the encyclopedia. Your recent posts at Talk:2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash clearly indicate that you see your job here as being to get out the Truth, to Right Great Wrongs, etc. But that's not what Wikipedia is for. You switched over to the talk page, which is better than edit warring on the article, but your talk page comments are pure mudslinging--an attempt to draw suppositions about what may or may not have happened in that crash. If that's what you want to do, get your own blog. Or write some investigative journalism and get it pubslihed in a newspaper. But we are not here to speculate about the deep, secret conspiracies behind airplane crashes. We are here to report what reliable sources have said. That's it--nothing more. Now, you can request an unblock, but when you do so, you're going to need to demonstrate an understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia, as well as an explanation for how you're going to edit differently in the future. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:48, 8 November 2012 (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).

Voyt13 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am here to improve the articles. At Talk:2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash I pointed out the evident errors in the current version of the article like this. An article containing such obvious lies cannot be acceptable. I also made a proposal and I am open to a discussion on it to make a consensus. But there was actually no discussion on it. Voyt13 (talk) 11:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Because of the nature of how Wikipedia works, it gets many users who try to use the encyclopedia to forward theories that have not been verified to be true in reliable sources. Very few of the users who want to use Wikipedia to promote conspiracy theories are open to changing their way of editing, and there are far too many of them to engage each one in long conversations to try to help them make more useful edits. If you want to write about conspiracy theories on the Internet, there are many good places for you to do that. But we simply don't have time to follow all of your edits and undo all the unhelpful ones, so you'll have to remained blocked here and write about your ideas on your own blog. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:13, 21 November 2012 (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.

2010_Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash[edit]

Thank You for your request on my polish page where I am on my other name. I will definitely help You with this. Cheers!--FitJock87 (talk) 02:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]