User talk:Noone.eth

Please read this, very carefully, and act accordingly. Also see this. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Incident
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JohnnyCoal (talk) 16:16, 19 June 2022 (UTC)"}}


 * I can confirm that this is not a shared account, it is my own personal account which is the same as my .eth domain, I can link you to my twitter profile if you wish so too. My username does not indicate this is a shared account either. I am sorry if my use of we is not perfectly aligned with english grammar (perhaps is a direct translation from spanish whichis my mother tongue). This doe snot change the fact that one of your administrators is continuously reverting edits which are accurate and adequately referenced in favour of inaccurate information. The experience so far on trying to contribute to wikipedia is worse than peer review journals when you get one of those incredibly ill informed and unknowledgeable reviewers, I have published >20 peer reviewed papers in high impact factor journals and cannot understand, and I am trying hard, the power that Johnycoal has somehow to just be able to write history as he pleases, despite it being incorrect, and with multiple users (not linked by the way) trying to make true factual edits. Noone.eth (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022
Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia because your username, Noone.eth, does not meet our username policy. Your username is the principal reason for the block. You are welcome to continue editing after you have selected a new username that meets the username policy guidelines, which are summarized below.Per the username policy, a username should represent an individual and should not: represent a group or organization; be promotional; be misleading (such as indicating possession of special user rights or being a "Bot" account (unless approved for such purposes)); be offensive or otherwise disruptive. However, a username that contains the name of a organization and also identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87" is allowed, but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company". Among others, the guidance on conflict of interest and the policy of paid-contribution disclosure are relevant.You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our username policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you wish for your existing contributions to carry over under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:
 * Adding below. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" from their talk page.
 * At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a change of name request.
 * Your requested new username cannot already be in use. Therefore, please check the list here to see if a name is taken prior to requesting a change of name.

Appeals: If, after reading the guide to appealing blocks you believe you were blocked in error, then you may appeal this block by adding below this notice.
 * Your consistent use of "we" indicates that this is a shared group account, which violates policy. A Wikipedia account is for the use of one person only. Cullen328 (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I can confirm that this is not a shared account, it is my own personal account which is the same as my .eth domain, I can link you to my twitter profile if you wish so too. My username does not indicate this is a shared account either. I am sorry if my use of we is not perfectly aligned with english grammar (perhaps is a direct translation from spanish whichis my mother tongue). This doe snot change the fact that one of your administrators is continuously reverting edits which are accurate and adequately referenced in favour of inaccurate information. The experience so far on trying to contribute to wikipedia is worse than peer review journals when you get one of those incredibly ill informed and unknowledgeable reviewers, I have published >20 peer reviewed papers in high impact factor journals and cannot understand, and I am trying hard, the power that Johnycoal has somehow to just be able to write history as he pleases, despite it being incorrect, and with multiple users (not linked by the way) trying to make true factual edits. Noone.eth (talk) 21:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a peer reviewed journal. We have very different policies and guudelines. This is not a place for artists and their friends and associates to engage in promotional activity. This is a neutrally written encyclopedia that summarizes what reliable, independent sources say about the topic. JohnnyCoal is not an administrator and I do not know what gave you that idea. JohnnyCoal is just an editor who understands Wikipedia's policies and guidelines better than you do at this point. That editor does not "write history as he pleases". On the other hand, I am an administrator and I blocked you because you were displaying signs of being a shared account. Individual people use "I" not "we". Ad Orientem is also an administrator, and semi-protected the article because of disruptive editing. So, two administrators see a serious problem here.


 * If you want to continue editing, you need to file a formal unblock request as described above. That request will be reviewed by another administrator. You must provide assurances that there will be no more disruption and that you will follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and defer to experienced editors who do not have a conflict of interest as you do. Cullen328 (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022
Cullen328 (talk) 17:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)