User talk:46.208.152.91

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).

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

---

Request reason:

According to the contributions of person who blocked me, they did so because I removed the bold face from the opening sentences of some articles. Indeed, I did. The manual of style mandates it. If an administrator responds to somebody doing exactly what the manual of style says they should do by blocking them and undoing their fixes, then something has gone terribly, terribly wrong with Wikipedia. 46.208.152.91 (talk) 21:49, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

TPA revoked for trying to waste our time yet again. Sro23 (talk) 22:02, 9 October 2020 (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.

The administrator also accuses me of snarky edit summaries. I suppose this refers to my edit summaries being critical. Exactly what is the problem with that? When was it decided that criticising poor quality would be a blockable offence? Again, if you respond to people pointing out very obvious and very severe deficiencies by blocking them and restoring the deficiencies, something has gone terribly, terribly wrong. 46.208.152.91 (talk) 21:54, 9 October 2020 (UTC)