User talk:Cjmonty

August 2018[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Candace Owens has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Candace Owens was changed by Cjmonty (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.855953 on 2018-08-06T14:01:25+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:01, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Candace Owens. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:05, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Candace Owens, you may be blocked from editing. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 14:06, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:Abelmoschus Esculentus‎. Thank you. —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 14:19, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changes being reverted, 5 seconds later, to maintain the status quo, is not good faith. Cjmonty (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:35, 6 August 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I seem to have been blocked for trying to describe an alt-right media personality as "alt-right", which seems to have upset the alt-right/gamergaters who run Wikipedia quite a lot. Maybe also a decent example of Wikipedias terrible diversity problem - 90% of Wikipedia editors are white males after all

Decline reason:

Your unblock request statement just makes complaints about what you see as problems with Wikipedia's community; it does not address the reason for your block, nor does it even try and make any sort of appeal as to how you'll avoid making the disruptive edits that you made in the future. Your comment blow this unblock request template seems to further iterate that you don't believe that you did anything wrong. Because of this, I am declining your request to be unblocked. Refer to this guide for instructions on how to make a proper appeal. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:11, 7 August 2018 (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.

Blocked for daring to edit alt-right pages[edit]

Lesson learned. Don't try to edit alt-right celebrities, when Wikipedia is run by an army of 30-something computer programmers, who probably quite like 4chan. Maybe an example of why 90% of Wikipedia editors probably shouldn't be white males.

Cjmonty (talk) 09:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, WP:SOAPBOX applies to user talk pages. —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 10:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Arborist has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Arborist was changed by Cjmonty (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.941308 on 2018-08-10T14:17:17+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What...[edit]

...was this about? It looks very much like trolling to me, and any further disruptive edits are very likely to earn you another block. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]