User talk:DoctorHarris21

Welcome!

Hello, DoctorHarris21, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Kingpin13 (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decker dog sources[edit]

Hy, you wrote in the history of the dingo article, that you haad multiple sources for the name Decker dog. What are these sources?--Inugami-bargho (talk) 04:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there as well! Here's a couple of sources my friend. http://www.greyhoundzoom.com/dingoes-under-threat/

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/dingo-australian-wild-dog.html DoctorHarris21 (talk) 04:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And guess what? It was written on March 2009, and lists wikipedia as a source. Mariomassone (talk) 06:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, when an article list wikipedia itself as a source, it's no longer reliable according to the rules. And the second one was clearly written by a person who did not list the sources. And when you read carefully you notice the style of the article. There is a lot that is not scientifically proven (e.g. that they mourn to death). We need more to decide whether the name is really reliable. There is a lot of crap out there about dingoes believe me. You have to be extremely careful.--Inugami-bargho (talk) 17:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

I've blocked you for 24h for tendentious editing at Dingo. First off, it is clear that you and MM are having a joly edit war, so I'm at a total loss to understand why you expect him to be blocked and not you. Second your repeated accusations of vandalism and hidden agendas fail WP:CIVIL. Third, it is pretty clear that your buzzle ref is just a copy of an old wiki article so fails WP:RS William M. Connolley (talk) 22:00, 1 July 2009 (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).

DoctorHarris21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have done nothing but positive contributions to Wikipedia. I was blocked for "tendentious", or biased, editing. I don't understand how my editing on the dingo page can be biased when I referenced a source every single time. I have included the nickname "Decker Dog" with different sources at different times as well, not just 1 common source. Recently I may have used the buzzle site as a source, which has been apparently called into question. However, other times I have used other sources such as http://www.factsnfacts.com/living_beings_facts/mammals_facts/dingoes/ and http://www.greyhoundzoom.com/dingoes-under-threat/

Decline reason:

Edit-warring is always disruptive, even when you are certain that you are right. In the future, when you know that other users disagree with you, wait to make your changes until the consensus is clear on the talk page. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:50, 2 July 2009 (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.