User talk:ToBeFree/A/6

• ToBeFree/A/1
• ToBeFree/A/2
• ToBeFree/A/3
• ToBeFree/A/4
• ToBeFree/A/5
• ToBeFree/A/6

Coming back to an old block - been busy

I would like to appeal a topic block, but want first to interact with you. The topic block is, IMHO (and I believe I can demonstrate it) based on NOT READING THE SOURCES and assuming bad faith. There are, in my edits, only sources. So, will you consider the sources? Twasonasummersmorn (talk) 16:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Twasonasummersmorn, it's been almost two years and things have changed a bit. Your ban is no longer something special; it may be removed by any administrator, for example in response to a normal unblock request. Not all administrators will be aware of this, so you should ideally point to this edit here somewhere in your request. Alternatively, you can appeal your topic ban at WP:AN, and the usual form requirements for such an appeal do not strictly apply anymore. You can go to WP:AN and point to this edit here (based on Wikipedia:Contentious_topics#Appeals_and_amendments's "more than a year ago" clause), explaining to the readers that you are appealing a topic ban that was set over a year ago and thus can be revoked by any administrator, and that it's fine with me if this happens.

For me personally to undo the ban, I personally would like to see an understanding of what led to it, which is edit warring and incivility (Special:Permalink/1131405903, block log). This is about your behavior and not the sources, and the misunderstanding displayed in Special:Diff/1130308434 appears to be still present, so I currently lack the hope I'd need to undo the ban. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

You'll have to point to incivility rather than accurate and polite description. And - again - the edit warring was where other people serially reverted accurate sources, acting in concert. If you're interested in the edits and the sources, they're there. If you're not, then there is indeed no point. Twasonasummersmorn (talk) 13:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to presume there's no point and that you're not interested in the actual sources. And the fact that others are serially, in concert, reverting the articles to say that a source says A when the source actually says not-A. Plus, undoing edits when new sources are offered that they don't like. If wikipedia admins don't care about what the sources actually say, then it's become as reliable as twitter. Twasonasummersmorn (talk) 12:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I have read your messages, but there's nothing convincing to me personally in them, and I have already explained why. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)