If you have any questions about my contributions, feel free to write me a note here, on my talk page, and we can discuss further. Cheers. Docholliday11 (talk) 23:54, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Docholliday11! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Novak Djokovic several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Novak Djokovic, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Novak Djokovic shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Edit warring over linking "Serbian" and "Serbia". Thank you. Thedarkknightli (talk) 16:18, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
You have two choices: Either stop overlininking "Serbia" and "Serbian", or get blocked for disruptive editing. Which do you choose? Cullen328 (talk) 16:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. signed, Rosguill talk 19:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Docholliday11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was blocked INDEFINITELY NOT TEMPORARILY for following clear Wikipedia guidelines and their exceptions. There are both agressive and passive agressive users which decided that I had certain intentions behind my edits. I found these insinuations and accusations disgusting. I am a medical practitioner who is by ethnicity Serbian yes. That does not change the fact that these are not draconian rules that do not have exceptions, but rather GUIDELINES, implemented to steer articles and their information towards a consensus format. They clearly state that a nationality/ethnicity MAY BE LINKED if it is not well known by the GENERAL population. These users who disagree may subjectively believe the terms in question are well known, however I assure you that if we did a survey right now, just in the United States (not the entire world) most would not be able to locate it on a map. I have been editing wiki for YEARS. Please conduct a comprehensive investigation of the situation and change this ban. Please also conduct an investigation into those users who have been in correspondence with me throughout this mess. Some people should not weild such authority. Thank you.Docholliday11 (talk) 19:32, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You have been edit warring to add disputed links to nationality to articles for years. Your responses when your edits are disputed are overly aggressive and uncollaborative. This is a good block. Ponyobons mots 19:37, 20 September 2024 (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.
I was blocked INDEFINITELY NOT TEMPORARILY for following clear Wikipedia guidelines and their exceptions. There are both agressive and passive agressive users which decided that I had certain intentions behind my edits. I found these insinuations and accusations disgusting. I am a medical practitioner who is by ethnicity Serbian yes. That does not change the fact that these are not draconian rules that do not have exceptions, but rather GUIDELINES, implemented to steer articles and their information towards a consensus format. They clearly state that a nationality/ethnicity MAY BE LINKED if it is not well known by the GENERAL population. These users who disagree may subjectively believe the terms in question are well known, however I assure you that if we did a survey right now, just in the United States (not the entire world) most would not be able to locate it on a map.
I have been editing wiki for YEARS. Please conduct a comprehensive investigation of the situation and change this ban.
Please also conduct an investigation into those users who have been in correspondence with me throughout this mess. Some people should not weild such authority.
Thank you. Docholliday11 (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Docholliday11 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I would like this reviewed by someone other than Ponyo. I was blocked INDEFINITELY NOT TEMPORARILY for following clear Wikipedia guidelines and their exceptions. There are both agressive and passive agressive users which decided that I had certain intentions behind my edits. I found these insinuations and accusations disgusting. I am a medical practitioner who is by ethnicity Serbian yes. That does not change the fact that these are not draconian rules that do not have exceptions, but rather GUIDELINES, implemented to steer articles and their information towards a consensus format. They clearly state that a nationality/ethnicity MAY BE LINKED if it is not well known by the GENERAL population. These users who disagree may subjectively believe the terms in question are well known, however I assure you that if we did a survey right now, just in the United States (not the entire world) most would not be able to locate it on a map. I have been editing wiki for YEARS. Please conduct a comprehensive investigation of the situation and change this ban. Please also conduct an investigation into those users who have been in correspondence with me throughout this mess. Some people should not weild such authority. Thank you. Docholliday11 (talk) 20:12, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Making the same unblock request again isn't going to change anything, and calling out other editors instead of focusing on your actions is a sure fire way to not get unblocked. Your unblock request needs to be about you, your edits and what you will change and the mistakes you madae. It cannot be about others in any way. And you don't get to demand investigations into other users, or any other kind of demand. Feel free to try again with an unblock request, but be aware if you continue to make it about others it will be declined. If you continue to make demands regarding others you may end up with your talk page access being removed. Canterbury Tail talk 21:49, 20 September 2024 (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.