User talk:Apoel4

Esteghlal F.C.[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Esteghlal F.C.. 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. Shahin (talk) 10:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What does it matter to you? Do you own Wikipedia? Wikipedia belongs to everyone Apoel4 (talk) 10:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid resources added after the edit war Apoel4 (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Esteghlal F.C., you may be blocked from editing. Shahin (talk) 11:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what's your problem ? Why do you delete and manipulate all the contents?

I report to the managers Apoel4 (talk) 13:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Esteghlal F.C.. Shahin (talk) 13:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you deleting my edits? Where is the problem with my edits?

You are not a neutral user Apoel4 (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem with my content? Apoel4 (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explain to me why you delete my content? Apoel4 (talk) 14:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 15:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why?[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).

Apoel4 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Apoel4 (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Why did you block me? You give no chance to defend? Shahin user deletes content with source. Shahin user is not a neutral user and does not have an unbiased view.[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 17:18, 5 May 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.

Why?[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).

Apoel4 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Apoel4 (talk) 18:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)I promise to consult users before editing to help Wikipedia and be useful for Wikipedia. If possible, please unblock me.[reply]

Decline reason:

That's a start, but you will need to explain what exactly was disruptive about your actions, and describe what steps you will take to adopt a more collaborative mindset than you have displayed thus far. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 6 May 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.

vandalism[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Persepolis F.C.. 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. Shahin (talk) 16:18, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits have no documentation because you are without logic Apoel4 (talk) 16:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Persepolis F.C., you may be blocked from editing. Shahin (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the source of the talk of the Asian Football Confederation?

Why do you publish false content? Apoel4 (talk) 16:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Persepolis F.C.. Shahin (talk) 16:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will stop false content Apoel4 (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you publish false content? Apoel4 (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2024 (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. Thank you. Shahin (talk) 16:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why?[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).

Apoel4 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why are you blocking me for no reason? I just stopped the publication of the wrong and wrong article. Why is the user of Shahin who publishes false content not published? Please don't block me for no reason

Decline reason:

Upon further investigation, including looking at your initial edits that resulted in your first block, I believe your intent was based on battelground behavior, not concern for our sourcing policies. I believe the block needs to remain in place to emphasize that this will absolutely not be tolerated. When this block expires, if you continue to import disputes from Persian WP to here, you will be blocked indefinitely. We have enough confilcts here without having them brought from other sites. Floquenbeam (talk) 17:30, 14 May 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.

Another administrator will be along to review your request. In the meantime, I suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:3RR and WP:DR. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 17:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake Wartenberg: As I assume you know, I blocked this user on May 5 for week for disruption. We are now two days after expiration of that block, and the user is continuing to be a disruption. Plus, it's obvious they have no insight into their behavior. I've never seen so many sections called "why?". I would have indefinitely blocked the user.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection if you would like to extend the block to indefinite. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 17:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My first instinct is to wait to see what happens, but I won't oppose if you (Bbb23) decide to extend it. But in this case, I suspect extending it will lead to the appearance of being too harsh when disruption after a 1-week block expires would result in a lot less disagreement. That might make waiting worth it. Floquenbeam (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC) too slow. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 17:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]