User talk:Nuclear Milkman

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Race and intelligence. 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. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Race and intelligence. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from lying and removing comments that point out you're lying. Nuclear Milkman (talk) 13:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Talk:Race and intelligence 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Instead of reverting, please use the talk page"

They delete comments to the talk page. Nuclear Milkman (talk) 13:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough! You can still break the rule on the talk page though. You may want to talk it out here, where you can ping those users, or go to their talk pages. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting my comments to the talk page is ok? By clearly involved editors? Nuclear Milkman (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Nuclear_Milkman reported by User:JayBeeEll (Result: ). Thank you. JBL (talk) 13:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Race and intelligence. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's clear you're not here to collaboratively edit an encyclopaedia, but to hurl personal attacks at others (calling others pathological liars and moronic charlatan's straight out of the gate), violate WP:3RR, WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and basically make edits indistinguishable from a troll all with your first few hours, you have been blocked from editing.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'm sorry I used hurtful words while pointing out that your editors are pathological liars who misrepresent science. I guess you're too thick to have any opinion of that. Can I come back in now? PS building an encyclopedia involves writing accurate information, not being a giant baby that can't handle criticism. Nuclear Milkman (talk) 13:15, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Interesting approach, this unblock request. I mean, obviously it's not going to work out for you, but I applaud your efforts. Declined. Yamla (talk) 13:25, 30 April 2021 (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.