→Your block: cm |
Chernobog95 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
:You are delusional by considering that I don't understand simple english as you ignore and don't want to admit that my proficiency of english is decent for a non native as evident by others able to understand well what I am saying. You claim it isn't supported by sources as you also falsely claim that it is my claim as you either ignore what is written in those articles or for one reason or another it goes against your interest or you have issues with understanding your mothertounge. Forcing range estimate that originator of it said it is flawed due to not accounting Earth's rotation makes that estimation invalid as it inaccurate by not incorporating crucial world related detail that Earth rotates thus forcing such estimate goes against one principle of Wikipedja which is accuracy that used/presented information has. Their claim is not my claim, it is in article and you take out of context what goes against your interest. You can lie all you want, 6700km estimate is inaccurate and 9700km is theoretical as any other estimate about North Korean missile and having double standards is what you are guilty of as evident by your actions. Chernobog95 12:27 July 12th 2017 |
:You are delusional by considering that I don't understand simple english as you ignore and don't want to admit that my proficiency of english is decent for a non native as evident by others able to understand well what I am saying. You claim it isn't supported by sources as you also falsely claim that it is my claim as you either ignore what is written in those articles or for one reason or another it goes against your interest or you have issues with understanding your mothertounge. Forcing range estimate that originator of it said it is flawed due to not accounting Earth's rotation makes that estimation invalid as it inaccurate by not incorporating crucial world related detail that Earth rotates thus forcing such estimate goes against one principle of Wikipedja which is accuracy that used/presented information has. Their claim is not my claim, it is in article and you take out of context what goes against your interest. You can lie all you want, 6700km estimate is inaccurate and 9700km is theoretical as any other estimate about North Korean missile and having double standards is what you are guilty of as evident by your actions. Chernobog95 12:27 July 12th 2017 |
||
::What you don't seem to understand is that the source doesn't say that the Hwasong-14 has a range of 9,700 km, only that ''there is a slight chance that it, when fully developed, might perhaps be able to reach that far''. And per Wikipedia's rules we do '''not''', repeat '''not''', add mere speculations (see [[WP:CRYSTAL]]), especially not when the mere speculations are presented as facts, as in your repeated edits on both [[North Korea and weapons of mass destruction]] and [[Hwasong-14]]. Which means that you will be blocked again if you make the same type of edits again. - '''Tom''' | [[User:Thomas.W|Thomas.W]] [[User talk:Thomas.W|'''''<sup><small> talk</small></sup>''''']] 10:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
::What you don't seem to understand is that the source doesn't say that the Hwasong-14 has a range of 9,700 km, only that ''there is a slight chance that it, when fully developed, might perhaps be able to reach that far''. And per Wikipedia's rules we do '''not''', repeat '''not''', add mere speculations (see [[WP:CRYSTAL]]), especially not when the mere speculations are presented as facts, as in your repeated edits on both [[North Korea and weapons of mass destruction]] and [[Hwasong-14]]. Which means that you will be blocked again if you make the same type of edits again. - '''Tom''' | [[User:Thomas.W|Thomas.W]] [[User talk:Thomas.W|'''''<sup><small> talk</small></sup>''''']] 10:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
||
:::What you don't seem to understand is your claim is a logical fallacy and double standards as again you are taking out of context what is written in the source as you falsely claim it is presented as facts as you ignore it is an estimate thus speculation as previous estimations are yet this one is invalid according to your standard which is a double standard and good, block me out of your hypocrisy and force informations that are outdated. Your claim about John Schilling has said contradicts what he actually said as you claim maybe with slight chance while he said likely thus context between what you claim he said and what he said are considerably if not vastly different. That is your interpretation that misinterprets what he has actually said and thus I am blocked from editting due to being accurate in expressing his statement without changing the context of it while you change it completely. Maybe is used when something uncertain while Likely when it is certain with this being the case involving theoretical range of missile as previous estimations were. He is certain about its capability and disregarding view of expert who has decades of experience is disrespectful to his hard work and scientists like him. You need to stop with denial and accept reality, lying to yourself, lying about who said what by forcing your interpretation that takes out of context his statement and being hypocrite about involving sources proves that you are unreliable due to your astroturfing/trolling. As a person that you are, I can't expect any apology from you as shown by your behaviour of brinkmanship and beligerence towards facts. His estimate is a speculation as others before him and me being condemn for being factual about what he has said is pathetic turn of events as you and others force your own facts like Fox News with Fox Facts. Chernobog95 14:12 Julyn12th 2017 |
Revision as of 12:41, 12 July 2017
Lay off insulting other editors. I haven't re-written the engines part yet. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:49, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
July 2017
Your addition to Hwasong-14 has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please don't cut and paste material from websites (in this case, https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/north-koreas-icbm-a-new-missile-and-a-new-era/) - particularly when the website uses non-neutral terms when discussing the topic. BencherliteTalk 14:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Hwasong-14. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:42, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on North Korea and weapons of mass destruction. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Also, how dare you insert that I "prefer outdated information" on your edit on the Hwasong-14, for your information, I do NOT "prefer outdated information". Hornetzilla78 (talk) 16:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Please stop vandalizing by reverting my edits as you misinform/mislead people by forcing information that is not up to date and has no relevance. Telling the truth to you is anyway personal attacks. Be offended at facts of your actions, how I dare point out your actions of using older information instead of newer more accurate ones. You are forcinf 6700km which is in accurate as David Wright admitted he didn't take into account earths rotation and Schilling revised his 8000km estimation to 9700km.Chernobog95 (talk) 18:39, 11 July 2017
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at North Korea and weapons of mass destruction. The source you added does not say that the missile has a range of 9,700 km, it says that it might one day get it, when fully developed... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 17:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Then by your standard none of sources involving theoretical range of North Korean missile is valid and so be it that estimation of 6700km for Hwasong-14 stays there despite individual who made that estimation has said it is invalid. Chernobog95 20:47 July 11 2017
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Amortias (T)(C) 21:10, 11 July 2017 (UTC)- It is unfair that there is double standards about sources, the ones I used are from well respected and credible, often used as sources. Those individuals insist on 6700km figure by David Wright who later retracted his estimation due to not accounting for Earth's rotation into calculation of theoretical range while also they are denying 9700km estimate by John Schilling that is also theoretical. I am unfairly blocked due to false charges of poor/invalid sources to deny Hwasong-14 and other pages being updated with more relevant accurate information. John Schilling gave 8000km estimate and he is part of 38North and his newer estimate is 9700km. My last edit was a compromise to then and here I am blocked from editing due to narrative that is factually incorrect.
Chernobog95 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=sources I used are valid and don't break rules [[User:Chernobog95|"path of prospero"]] ([[User talk:Chernobog95#top|talk]]) 22:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}}
with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=sources I used are valid and don't break rules [[User:Chernobog95|"path of prospero"]] ([[User talk:Chernobog95#top|talk]]) 22:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here
with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=sources I used are valid and don't break rules [[User:Chernobog95|"path of prospero"]] ([[User talk:Chernobog95#top|talk]]) 22:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Chernobog95 00:38 July 12 2017
- Did you take into account that the source you provide is actually copyrighted, and you used it without the holder's permission? SamaranEmerald (talk) 01:03, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- I only referenced the source(link) like others did, referencing it is not banned as evident by extensive referencing of their articles and same for NK News on wikipedka. All of the sudden those two individuals and now apparently moderator/admin deemed it apparently as unreliable/poor source as they force one information that originator of it deemed flawed and gave a reason why. Chernobog95 03:49 12th July 2017
- But why did you cyberbully these users as mentioned on the warnings posted above? You should know doing that is against WP:NPA. SamaranEmerald (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- They are guilty of what they did as proven by their actions as they repeatedly reverted my edits to force information that is outdated and no longer relevant due to newer more accurate appearing. Calling out for actions that they commited is not cyberbulling which is being used as a cop out to not feel the consequences of their actions that lead to ignorance. Chernobog 95 12:04 July 12th 2017
Your block
You were blocked for repeatedly adding material that is not supported by the source you added, i.e. the source does not say what you claim it says (see what I wrote in the final warning you got, and also see Talk:North Korea and weapons of mass destruction#Range of the Hwasong-14). If you can't understand simple English in messages posted here, and can't understand what the sources say, you shouldn't edit Wikipedia at all. Period. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 07:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- You are delusional by considering that I don't understand simple english as you ignore and don't want to admit that my proficiency of english is decent for a non native as evident by others able to understand well what I am saying. You claim it isn't supported by sources as you also falsely claim that it is my claim as you either ignore what is written in those articles or for one reason or another it goes against your interest or you have issues with understanding your mothertounge. Forcing range estimate that originator of it said it is flawed due to not accounting Earth's rotation makes that estimation invalid as it inaccurate by not incorporating crucial world related detail that Earth rotates thus forcing such estimate goes against one principle of Wikipedja which is accuracy that used/presented information has. Their claim is not my claim, it is in article and you take out of context what goes against your interest. You can lie all you want, 6700km estimate is inaccurate and 9700km is theoretical as any other estimate about North Korean missile and having double standards is what you are guilty of as evident by your actions. Chernobog95 12:27 July 12th 2017
- What you don't seem to understand is that the source doesn't say that the Hwasong-14 has a range of 9,700 km, only that there is a slight chance that it, when fully developed, might perhaps be able to reach that far. And per Wikipedia's rules we do not, repeat not, add mere speculations (see WP:CRYSTAL), especially not when the mere speculations are presented as facts, as in your repeated edits on both North Korea and weapons of mass destruction and Hwasong-14. Which means that you will be blocked again if you make the same type of edits again. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- What you don't seem to understand is your claim is a logical fallacy and double standards as again you are taking out of context what is written in the source as you falsely claim it is presented as facts as you ignore it is an estimate thus speculation as previous estimations are yet this one is invalid according to your standard which is a double standard and good, block me out of your hypocrisy and force informations that are outdated. Your claim about John Schilling has said contradicts what he actually said as you claim maybe with slight chance while he said likely thus context between what you claim he said and what he said are considerably if not vastly different. That is your interpretation that misinterprets what he has actually said and thus I am blocked from editting due to being accurate in expressing his statement without changing the context of it while you change it completely. Maybe is used when something uncertain while Likely when it is certain with this being the case involving theoretical range of missile as previous estimations were. He is certain about its capability and disregarding view of expert who has decades of experience is disrespectful to his hard work and scientists like him. You need to stop with denial and accept reality, lying to yourself, lying about who said what by forcing your interpretation that takes out of context his statement and being hypocrite about involving sources proves that you are unreliable due to your astroturfing/trolling. As a person that you are, I can't expect any apology from you as shown by your behaviour of brinkmanship and beligerence towards facts. His estimate is a speculation as others before him and me being condemn for being factual about what he has said is pathetic turn of events as you and others force your own facts like Fox News with Fox Facts. Chernobog95 14:12 Julyn12th 2017
- What you don't seem to understand is that the source doesn't say that the Hwasong-14 has a range of 9,700 km, only that there is a slight chance that it, when fully developed, might perhaps be able to reach that far. And per Wikipedia's rules we do not, repeat not, add mere speculations (see WP:CRYSTAL), especially not when the mere speculations are presented as facts, as in your repeated edits on both North Korea and weapons of mass destruction and Hwasong-14. Which means that you will be blocked again if you make the same type of edits again. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)