148.75.162.21

July 2022

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Talk:Paul Krugman. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I included a link to the NY Times op-ed on the subject, written by Krugman himself.

You allowed and encouraged the left wing wack-job SPECIFICO to delete ... aka CENSOR ... all dissenting views.

Kindly get all the facts before you comment 148.75.162.21 (talk) 15:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

You did include the link to the op-ed. You also included inappropriate comments that will end up with you getting reverted. Please learn from this. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  – Muboshgu (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Mobushgu jumped into a censorship problem very late, didn't bother to read the history, and took sides with a very disruptive very partisan user SPECIFICO... who has been repeatedly criticized by numerous other users for his partisan posts. Mobushgu insists that I should behave according to some hidden (poorly disclosed) "rules" while excusing SPECIFICO's repeated censorship. Of course, when called out on the problem that he didn't bother to actually read up on, Muboshgo responded like a infantile wikiped and censors dissent. If Wikipedia really wants civil discussions, why don't you practice what you preach? Why do you support censorship? Do you really think that silencing dissent is going to lead to civilized debate? Muboshgo owes me an apology, but I doubt he has the character to admit he is wrong. Wikipedia doesn't have the guts to enforce its own rules on its inner clique. you are cowards who censor and delete topics that don't conform to your very partisan view of the world. I don't benefit from correcting bad information on your site. I do benefit from realizing that Wikipedia does not live up to the standards and principals it advertises. 148.75.162.21 (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

WP:GAB explains how to craft an unblock request. Yamla (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2022 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Censoring people on your website is not going to fix wikipedia's rapidly declining reputation. You go ahead and block the public's ability to improve your pages, but wikipedia is just a website not the real world. In the real world, one of wikipedia's founders is saying the site has basic culture problems. 148.75.162.21 (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You are misusing the unblock template. Continuing to present requests that are not WP:GAB compliant, will eventually result in your losing the ability to edit this page. Tiderolls 18:51, 25 July 2022 (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.

---