User talk:24.47.152.65

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 18:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

What specific edits were disruptive and where can I find a discussion of this? 24.47.152.65 (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, as far as I can tell, this block is about attempting to get Christian puppetry deleted. The article has no citations at all, and offers no reason for anyone to believe that Christian puppetry is even a thing, much less a notable one.

It doesn't show up in my contributions, but this was a follow-up to successfully flagging an article on One Way Street puppet shows [1] for deletion for much the same reason; no citations, no evidence of notability, apparent self-promotion. The error I made was in using the wrong tag initially.[2] This was correctly rejected, so I fixed it by using the right tag.[3]

In response to this, and without further discussion, User:Bbb23 blocked me for "disruptive editing". I asked Bbb23 to explain their reasoning, but they haven't responded. If they had, I would have pointed out that I added the tag in good faith, and while they were within their rights to reject it in favor of an AfD or some other path towards deletion, the block is unjustified.

I am therefore asking to be unblocked. 24.47.152.65 (talk) 22:50, 12 July 2019 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Tag was added in good faith: see above. 24.47.152.65 (talk) 22:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Regardless of any other issues, you're still following JesseRafe around. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:49, 13 July 2019 (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.

I don't follow. If I'm doing something wrong with regard to Jesse, which I'm not, then there's this whole ANI procedure to handle it. In the meantime, I was blocked mistakenly after a good-faith edit, but that doesn't seem to bother you.

Strange. It's almost as if Wikipedia doesn't even want to have the semblance of fairness. You would have to expect that someone contemplating further contributions would be completely turned off. Perhaps that's your goal? 24.47.152.65 (talk) 02:01, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one month for continuing to follow JesseRafe around. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

El_C 10:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]