Rr1290

Not a minor edit

Don't mark an edit as minor when it isn't. That's both deceptive and confusing to others. In fact, there is really no reason to ever mark an edit as minor, so stay on the safe side. If you do that again, I'll seek to have you blocked for disruption. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

So getting rid of ONE word is not a minor edit? How is that me being disruptive for me editing ONE word. Don't tell me how to edit things, I'm going to do that on my own. I think editing ONE word is a very minor edit. I can't believe that silliness and you would block me for saying an edit is minor when it's ONE word. Again ONE word. All you left wingers do is attack people on here and not have a care in the world about it. Rr1290 (talk) 15:25, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Another thing. Why even have the feature then if I have no reason do it. And why have the feature if I could get blocked from it? Ridicoulous Rr1290 (talk) 15:31, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Read Help:Minor edit. Your edit was whitewashing that changed the meaning of the content. One word can do that. Also, don't ever attack other editors for their political positions: "Using someone's political affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views, such as accusing them of being left-wing or right-wing, is also forbidden. Editors are allowed to have personal political POV, as long as it does not negatively affect their editing and discussions." We document what RS say. You seem to be trying to right great wrongs and wage a political battle here. Take that attitude somewhere else. You are clearly not here to improve the encyclopedia but instead are trying to bend it toward your own political persuasion. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:54, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Rane43 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rane43. 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  firefly ( t · c ) 16:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet 2

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Rane43 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rane43. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

firefly ( t · c ) 16:16, 15 September 2023 (UTC)