User talk:Simeon Mortensen

This is Simeon Mortensen's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

sto

unt otirsests usives relivenan ame cus oft

essigivat num

hed nettin oviess ousel

cencregre capedurt day

glevert ems specoolue

systit far sear systims ote ker

July 2024

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For a start, what I did was plainly not vandalism, even if you disagree with it; secondly, you really shouldn't jump straight to giving people final warnings, except in cases of extremely serious vandalism. You seem to be doing this every time you revert something. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And here - you reverted a very constructive edit and gave the user a final warning for vandalism. Why did you do that? AntiDionysius (talk) 14:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Welcome!

Hi Simeon Mortensen! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Doug Weller talk 14:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is why I reverted you at Yair Netanyahu‎

Doug Weller talk 14:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giving an only warning to experienced editors is foolish

It just makes you look as though you don't know what you are doing. Doug Weller talk 14:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a sock. I had a similar case in January. Borgenland (talk) 14:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 14:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simoen Mortensen WP:NOTHERE

Ignore warnings, user has been reported again. Identical vandalism as earlier blocked Bret Hayes (talk · contribs) and Dr. Chance Padberg (talk · contribs), on a new account Simeon Mortensen (talk · contribs). ApricotFoot (talk) 14:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Borgenland (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

{{unblock reviewed |1=Blocked for Sockpuppetry but there is no evidence for this, hence I must be unblocked for technical reasons. Simeon Mortensen (talk) 3:33 pm, Today (UTC+1) |{{See [[WP:ANI#

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).

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

Request reason:

Blocked for Sockpuppetry but there is no evidence for this, hence I must be unblocked for technical reasons. Simeon Mortensen (talk) 3:33 pm, Today (UTC+1)

Decline reason:

See WP:ANI#User:Simeon Mortensen Doug Weller talk 14:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

]]} Doug Weller talk 14:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)}}[reply]

Second unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

The link above does not provide any actual evidence, it merely cites WP:DUCK which is not valid evidence. You must unblock me immediately, for legal reasons, unless you want to be sued for emotional distress. Simeon Mortensen (talk) 15:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There were many ways to contest this block. You chose...poorly. Declining, and until the legal threat is removed no unblock will be considered. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

And now per WP:NLT you cannot be unblocked until your withdraw your threat. Doug Weller talk 15:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]