Contents

User talk:Biainili

Hello, Biainili, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Orontid dynasty. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Denver| Thank you (talk) 09:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for disruptive editing and personal attacks. Please use article talk pages often rather than edit war. If you reach an impasse there, please feel free to make use of any dispute resolution request you see fit. Your conduct as an editor falls bellow expectations. Please do better. 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 21:18, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-blocked you, this time, for a month. You need to start observing WP:ONUS, especially the part that reads: the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content. Note that the next block is likely to be indefinite in duration. El_C 15:05, 28 April 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

El C didn't review the report justly, only listened one side of the story, I didn't break any rules, I edited Ptolemaeus of Commagene page with a reliable source, I even created new section on Talk page about it, but HistoryofIran reverted my edit two times regardless, also LouisAragon‎ reverted shortly after HistoryofIran, I don't know what's going on between these two users, with no valid explanation [1], his reverting reason : "rv, here we go again", clearly shows aggressive attitude towards me. LouisAragon‎‎ and HistoryofIran disrupting every Armenian/Georgian/Azerbaijani pages with their obvious Iranian bias, and no one can't do anything about it, because these users been here for a long time, and made friends here, they support each other on Noticeboards in any case, as soon as a new user tries to contribute Wikipedia, HistoryofIran and LouisAragon‎ immediately start messaging with each other on their talk pages, then get the user, they disagree with, banned with false accusations. These users are doing a disservice to the Wikipedia. See:Please do not bite the newcomers Also, I want another administrator to review this case. Biainili (talk) 16:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

WP:NOTTHEM. Your complete obliviousness to the problems with your own conduct strongly suggests that setting an expiry date on this block was overly generous; if your next unblock request does not address the issue, you are likely to be blocked indefinitely. Yunshui ^雲_水 06:51, 29 April 2020 (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.

The fact that you engage in personal attacks —accusing an editor in good standing of "vandalising"— in your very unblock request, speaks volumes as to why this should have been an indefinite block, which I now regret to not have applied (merely delaying the inevitable, methinks). El_C 16:19, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

El_C has a point. Would you like to redraft your unblock request without any personal attacks, including accusations of vandalism, against other editors? —C.Fred (talk) 16:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't see anything that acknowledges your conduct or what you will do different going forward. —C.Fred (talk) 19:09, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Biainili, but you are not permitted to edit by proxy while blocked. Please limit any usage of this talk page while blocked to an unblocked request only, or your access to editing this talk page may be revoked. Thank you. El_C 16:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your access to editing this talk page has been revoked. Appeal avenues are still available at the Unblock Ticket Request System. El_C 16:36, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have also now extended your block duration to indefinite, because I have very little confidence you will edit appropriately in a month's time. I recommend you read the guide to appealing blocks closely, if you wish to appeal (again, through UTRS). El_C 16:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]