User talk:Squidclaw

2017 Tour de France
I reverted your edits as the article is only about the 2017 edition of the race. Other information should go on the tour de France main article. --Racklever (talk) 19:45, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Squidclaw! Thank you for your contributions. I am MJL and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 15:14, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
 * Also, to address your concern: Eisenhower became President 20 January 1953. This was before the 1948 Siena Poll you discussed at Historical rankings of presidents of the United States. Thank you for your contributions! :D &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 15:18, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

July 2022
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. 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:. Cullen328 (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


 * You most certainly edited at your brother's behest. You wrote, "I got text from my bro to go check out the whining nonsense and crying and complaining against him on the 2022 Tour de France Wikipedia page so I did, then I made a few edits while I was there," on this your talk page. And you have unrelentingly complained about editors, myself included, on this talk page and elsewhere. --  Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Excuse me @Deepfriedokra I have "unrelentingly" complained about editors yourself included? On this page and "elsewhere"?

Oh really? So the only edits I have made on talk pages, which my editing history will verify, is ONE edit on the 2022 Tour de France talk page, AS IN A SINGLE ONE, and then the only other talk edits I made were in response to this presumptuous and illegitimate suspension.

You mean to tell me the ONE edit I made on the 2022 Tour de France talk page, and the TWO replies I made regarding this unwarranted and illegitimate suspension are the reason I am suspended. So the factual things I said after I got suspended is the reason I'm suspended?


 * 1) 1 - the edit I made on the 2022 Tour de France page was a perfectly rational and legitimate talk page edit of an assessment of the nonsense I read regarding the incident with my brother, which was high school level nonsense of the highest order which is fine, it is what it is, not everyone is a writer or a lawyer. It ended for him with a bunch of whining and complaints instead of an actual heated, constructive, rational or even irrational debate, but again that's fine, we can't expect everyone to be writers or lawyers now can we?

That's going to happen, they're going to get mad and then manipulate the situation to the best of their ability to make certain they appear like innocent victims, which is to be expected.

THE POINT IS, I was not "relentlessly complaining" with my ONE perfectly rational edit. It wasn't "complaining" at all, it was assessing the situation as I saw it as an outside observer. It was nonsense, so I acted accordingly and explained that it was in fact unnecessary and could have, and probably should have been avoided.


 * 1) 2 at no time did I say anything illegitimate things about any of the editors, including you, in my appeals page. I simply stated the Facts, I was suspended based on assumptions and false accusations of my alleged intent, which at no time was harmful or against any rules in any way shape or form which therefore makes this suspension unwarranted and illegitimate.

Finally, in regards to the Quoted comment from my talk page that you made in the reply just above this, I already explained this once so I'll explain it again, yes I received a text from my brother regarding a bunch of whining and complain so I went to check it out and after reading the actual article, which HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY ARGUMENT, I made a few edits THAT WERE FACTUAL EDITS THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE TOUR DE FRANCE THAT THE OTHER EDITORS INCLUDING MY BROTHER did not include, so I did.

I saw that there was content that was missing so I entered it in THAT IS ENTIRE POINT OF WIKIPEDIA IS IT NOT? I was reading the article and said hey they didn't include the stage 14 attack or the unique way the rider won on stage 19

THIS HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MY BROTHER OR ANY OTHER EDITORS, it was missing content so I was like what the hell, I'm here I might as well make an edit or two I haven't been here in three years so why not? It isn't that hard to copy and paste a citation template and then add in my source article info so that's what I did.

In closing, making ONE edit on a talk page assessing an argument between other people isn't UNRELENTING COMPLAINING It's one rational and realistic edit

And I have not complained about other editors, I stated the Facts as they are, which cannot be disputed as you know and I know. It was claimed that I went running to the defense of my brother by being edits in his favor and by attacking other edits. Neither of these incidents happened. I made a rational, relevant edit regarding the 2022 Tour de France, that had nothing to do with anyone. Perhaps you should go and look at the edits. And a rational, level headed assessment of the nonsense argument I read is not against any rules, nobody was attacked. It was a perfectly reasonable statement saying that the entire argument should have and could have been avoided.

I suppose I'll have to go appeal this suspension again so I'll copy and paste. Thanks, enjoy the day. Squidclaw (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

No, I can't read statements that are too long, not due to my reading comprehension, but because I am a volunteer here in my free time, and I have other things to do in my life. I did read your edits, I said that the merits of your edits are not relevant to the reason for your block(block evasion). You are very, very close to losing access to this page due to your personal attacks. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:53, 4 August 2022 (UTC)