User talk:OhioProgressives
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
April 2011
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Bob Hagan. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
{{unblock|your reason here}} below. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 13:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have been blocked for vandalizing, but nothing could be farther from the truth. I was adding info from an external link to certain pages. I am trying to improve Wikipedia by adding relevant information. If this is wrong then I am sorry, I thought you wanted users to improve upon the information.
Decline reason:
Obviously here with an agenda. 狐 WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN 13:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
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.
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Agenda? myonly agenda would be to add relative facts. I thought that was the entire purpose of wikipedia. I'm confused. ???
Decline reason:
I presume you assume that edits such as this and this qualify as adding relative information? Let me tell you that they don't qualify as such. Instead they count as link spam and NPOV violations. And i presume you also don't know user:MrXindeed, who was adding the same information minutes before you? Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 14:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
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.
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Yes, I thought those edits were pertinent to the information on that wiki. As for NPOV i understand that now I suppose, but I would ask who except for God himself has a neutral point of view on anything? But I get it now. Yes MrXindeed is me, but I wanted to sign in using a different more apt username. I kept the same IP addy, just switched usernames, I'm not trying to hide anything or dodge anything, merely trying to add information.
Decline reason:
This does not convince me that you "get it". All your edits have been disruptive. Combined with the abuse of multiple accounts, I am unconvinced that unblocking you would be a benefit to the project. Sandstein 14:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
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.
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I did not feel that my posts were disruptive. I thought I was giving an alternative viewpoint on certain pages in order to provide more balanced information that was pertinent to the subject. Which is what I thought was the point of Wikipedia, to provide complete information on a topic, as opposed to a single one sided view. As for multiple accounts, you can see that I signed up for both today, I used my normal email account username (MrXindeed)at first, but then I deleted all edits I made using that account. I then created an account name I felt fit more with my viewpoint and more in line with the online identity I would like to use on Wikipedia. I should have thought it out more before I created the first account. You can delete that account if you'd like, or I will if I can, either way it will be unused. The first account was a mistake on my part.
Decline reason:
I'm sorry you're still confused about our policies related to neutral point of view and biographies of living persons. After reviewing your edits, they were clearly unacceptable, and I am not comfortable unblocking while you're still claiming those contributions were in any way useful. Kuru (talk) 15:42, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
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.
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Ok looking back at my edits, and reading about the policies pointed out above, I can see that I was biased and a bit harsh. My mistake. It won't happen again if the block is lifted. As for the multiple accounts that was my mistake also, I should have thought it out better before I created the first account. The first account will go unused, I don't see a way to delete the account. Can a moderator do this for me?
Decline reason:
The sequence of these unblock requests seems confusing, but I'm declining this one too. It's all very well claiming you now understand and will abide by policies, but your continuing comments (like in the unblock request below) make it clear that you really don't understand what's wrong with using Wikipedia as a political soapbox to attack politicians you don't like -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
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.
- Unwanted accounts are not deleted. They just remain dormant and blocked. Ronhjones (Talk) 18:42, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Username concern
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (OhioProgressives) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it appears to relate closely to a political organisation directly linked to a major American political party. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account and use that for editing. Thank you. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So now my username is also in question? So let me see if I understand what I'm being told here. Wikipedia does not care to have complete information on a person or topic, whoever puts up the first entry is right. There is no room for alternative facts or viewpoints. It's just a matter of being the first to start a topic. Hypothetical, if Alpo makes a post about dog food touting the benefits of their ingredients, and I make a correction and say dogs can't digest corn, then I am vandalizing their page? I am curious to look around wikipedia and see some of the entries on certain topics, I'm wondering what the neutral view point of Adolf Hitler is. That should be interesting. I've tried to be straight forward throughout this process. I've looked at the policies, and admitted my mistakes, yet the block still remains in place. I suppose I could have changed my IP address, used one of many fake email services, and signed up again,but I haven't. I've been open and honest. There is always two sides to every story, but apparently not on wikipedia. I am beginning to see now why wikipedia has such a bad reputation throughout the internet for incorrect information.
Decline reason:
Actually, you have it completely backwards. We don't care what anyone's opinions are. Our commitment to a neutral point of view is ironclad; in the case of a Hitler, what constitutes neutrality is the consensus scholarship of the reliable sources cited the article. The issue with your username is pretty simple -- we don't allow usernames that are organizations or affiliated with organizations, or that imply the account is being used by a group. So, for example, if you'd called yourself "Ohio Progressive", that would be fine; you're just identifying yourself as a singular Progressive from Ohio. The plural implies you are representing an organization. And no, it's not who edits first; it's whoever provides the best reliable sources and also what the consensus of Wikipedia editors is. --jpgordon::==( o ) 23:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
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.
- Re: "Wikipedia does not care to have complete information on a person or topic..." In order to be unblocked, I'd suggest you need to make it clear that you understand that "complete information" does *not* include political attacks on your opponents and the promotion of campaigns against them. A comment like "The republican attack on the middle class working people of Ohio won't be tolerated!" accompanied by a campaign link is *not* encyclopedic information about the person in question -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:48, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
April 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Talk:Shannon Jones, you may be blocked from editing. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:25, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- And this is not about any supposed bias in Wikipedia. As I type this, I'm wearing my AFSCME t-shirt, my state employee ID, and my "Support the Wisconsin 14 - Solidarity Forever!" button. This is about the absolute requirement here that we not add our personal political statements to the articles themselves. (Good luck in your struggle in Ohio, by the way!) --Orange Mike | Talk 02:47, 2 April 2011 (UTC) (Secretary, AFSCME Local 91 of the WSEU, where AFSCME was born)
{{unblock| Okay, I get it now, Really. I actually read the wiki entry on Hitler and by gosh it's pretty darn neutral. So I totally understand that point. I also understand that I shouldn't post politically motivated entries on a wiki. I admit to my wrongs and would ask that the block be lifted. I will strive to follow the rules of which I am now aware of. Two things I don't understand. 1) How can I change my username? Since I'm forbidden to have multiple accounts how can I change it to simply Ohio Progressive without signing up again? 2)Also, not that I will do this, but I just want to make sure to avoid further complications. Would it be acceptable to cite the voting records of a political representative? I don't want to seem like I have an agenda, but I think the voting record of our representatives is a valid part of their legacy and should be available as part of the information on that individual. Yes or No, either way is fine, I just don't want anymore complications.}}
- First, there are SOME wikis where political motivation is encouraged. Wikipedia, being an encyclopedia, is not one of them,
- Second, should you become unblocked, we have a process at WP:UNC to get your username changed. Of course, the one you suggest is not very different from your current one, so it would likely be not permitted. You have 2 valid block reasons right now, and until both are satisfied) see WP:GAB, you're going nowhere.
- Third, are the voting records encyclopedic? Not likely. Their public record will remain elsewhere, thanks.
- Fourth, if you simply sign up again right now, you would be guilty of evading a valid block and be immediately blocked again, so let's resolve this first. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:55, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, someone else above did say "So, for example, if you'd called yourself "Ohio Progressive", that would be fine" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:09, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Unblocked
OhioProgressives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am getting different information from different people. One says this user name is wrong, change it to that, one says that's against policy too. One says it's a no-no to have multiple accounts, the link about changing your username says simply sign up for a new account.
It also says in the link to change username that users with few or no edits will not be changed, and to sign up for a new account. If I sign up for a new account then I am evading a block. Catch 22.
As far as the original block, I understand what I did, I'm sorry for it, and I won't do it again. Can we work on that. Assuming I'm unblocked, I can change my username or create a new account then. I don't think I can change it now because (from what I can tell by the original block) someone also put a block on my account creation.
So again, as to the original vandalism block, I have read the policies noted in the posts above, I understand what I did was wrong, I am sorry for it, and I will not do it again. As to information I might add to a page in the future, I will only post neutral viewpoint research, I will look through the policies again, and I will ask someone if I have any doubts. So could someone please give me a definitive answer on how to proceed?
Accept reason:
OK, I have unblocked you. Please create a new user account and post on THIS PAGE what your new user account is called. I'd avoid 'Ohio Progressive' - too similar, so use your imagination. If you don't post your new account, someone will find you anyway and both accounts will be blocked, so don't do that. Read up on our key policies about neutrality and verifiability - it's OK to have a political opinion, and to let folks know on you're userpage that you support X party or Y campaign, but don't bring it into articles or onto article talkpages. Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
- Cleared the autoblock and removed your request. Should be good to go. If not; please repost it. Side note: read Elen's note above very carefully - please, don't abuse her trust and good faith. Kuru (talk) 01:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
New Username
Thank You Elen of the Roads and Kuru!
I have created a new account with the username: Progressive Perimeter.
Progressive Perimeter (talk • contribs)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A perimeter is the boundary of a shape, or the length of that boundary.
So, the ever moving (or progressing) boundary.
I hope this passes the test.
OhioProgressives (talk) 01:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- That should be no problem. Ive left a welcome message on your new talkpage. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 09:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)