User talk:Overlord300

I don't understand the reason for the block? You have a person trying to falsify my country's history and he refuses to have a conversation about the subject or provide any historical evidence for the changes because he knows his claims are preposterous. You have a guy constantly vandalizing pages about Bulgarian history with a map showing Romania existing as a country in the 10th century??? And he refuses to engage in any debate regarding the issue, while using Wikipedia tools to silence me which I do not fully comprehend since I'm new to the platform. Are you completely blind to this injustice? Overlord300 (talk) 14:50, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

You'll be in a better position to appeal once you take the time to understand the block. I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you:
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Cabayi (talk) 15:07, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

I would like to be unblocked since I am unaware of many of Wikipedia s rules and procedures. I would be incredibly grateful for any advice on how to handle the issue at hand and I believe the contributions I can make can be very useful since I am a history major and my university education is focused on the subject. Please advise me on how I can properly proceed with the member jingibi who is actively vandalizing pages with historical content on my country. He refuses to engage in a debate on the subject and has not been banned continuously falsifying our history for over an year with many members pointing that out. I have asked for advice on the subject but I feel neglected and ganged up on with no one addressing the situation or giving the time to explain anything. Is this what wikipedia strives to be and why its not a respectable place to be quoted? I regret not seeking more advice and familiarizing myself better with wikipedia s ruleset. Please as someone with more experience assist me with understanding my wrongs in better detail so that I can contribute to this community properly. Overlord300 (talk) 20:36, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

WP:NOTTHEM * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:27, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I would like to request reconsideration of my block. After reading Wikipedia's policies on civility, harassment, and dispute resolution, I understand that my conduct on the talk page came across as confrontational and battleground-like. Regardless of the content dispute that was occurring, I should not have accused another editor of vandalism, speculated about their nationality, or pushed the discussion in a hostile direction. I understand that this behavior violates Wikipedia’s expectations for civil discussion. And i will seek to receive additional advice from a senior editor on how to tackle the issue since the second party does not wish to engage in a discussion on the issue and faces no repercussion at the same time. I was new to Wikipedia editing at the time and did not fully understand how disputes over historical content should be handled. I now understand that disagreements about sources or maps should be addressed through calm discussion, reliable sources, and the appropriate dispute resolution processes rather than personal accusations. If unblocked, I will focus on discussing content rather than contributors and will follow the dispute resolution process properly (including seeking consensus and third-party input when necessary). I will avoid personal remarks and keep discussions strictly about sources and historical evidence. I would like the opportunity to contribute constructively, particularly in areas of history where I have academic background, while adhering to Wikipedia’s policies. Thank you for your time and consideration.

WP:NICETRY _signed, Rosguill ^talk 03:17, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

I would like to request reconsideration of my block. After reading Wikipedia's policies on civility, harassment, and dispute resolution, I understand that my conduct on the talk page came across as confrontational and battleground-like. Regardless of the content dispute that was occurring, I should not have accused another editor of vandalism, speculated about their nationality, or pushed the discussion in a hostile direction. I understand that this behavior violates Wikipedia’s expectations for civil discussion. And i will seek to receive additional advice from a senior editor on how to tackle the issue since the second party does not wish to engage in a discussion on the issue and faces no repercussion at the same time. I was new to Wikipedia editing at the time and did not fully understand how disputes over historical content should be handled. I now understand that disagreements about sources or maps should be addressed through calm discussion, reliable sources, and the appropriate dispute resolution processes rather than personal accusations. If unblocked, I will focus on discussing content rather than contributors and will follow the dispute resolution process properly (including seeking consensus and third-party input when necessary). I will avoid personal remarks and keep discussions strictly about sources and historical evidence. I would like the opportunity to contribute constructively, particularly in areas of history where I have academic background, while adhering to Wikipedia’s policies. Thank you for your time and consideration.

This is the same unblock request that has previously been declined. Your next unblock request should be something new, not this posted again. According to GPTZero, you used AI to write most of it. In future, please write unblock requests entirely in your own words, I am declining this unblock request. PhilKnight (talk) 15:26, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Denying my unblock request 5 times in a row because I didn't know the wikipedia rules, while someone else abused them to falsify my country's history, refuses to engage in a discussion about it and bears no repercussions at the same time? Where is the justice, is wikipedia s community a cabal for falsifying information? Is this the reason no university professors take wikipedia seriously as a place to be quoted, because there are no standards? You want me to engage in a humiliation ritual by apologizing for something I do not believe in and you expect for it to be sincere? The only thing I am to blame for is not understanding the rules and didn't have a proper approach or enough information to tackle the issue. Someone has been purposefully attempting to falsify my country's history over and over for 2 years without any sources for his outlandish claims and there are no repercussions for him. Where is the justice in this, have you no shame? Is this a community you can be proud of?

Overlord300 (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

User continues to show no understanding of why they were blocked and continues to suggest they will not engage in consensus building. Sasquatch t|c 07:01, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

I would like to request to be unblocked. I have taken the time to reflect and cool down, read Wikipedia's policies on civility, harassment, and dispute resolution and I understand that my conduct on the talk page was unacceptable. I will seek to receive additional advice from a senior editor on how to properly tackle such issues in the future so that I may adhere to Wikipedia s conduct. I was new to Wikipedia editing at the time and did not fully understand how disputes over historical content should be handled. If unblocked, and there is a dispute I will seek the opinion and help of a 3d party if I have a disagreement with another editor even if he refuses to engage in a discussion about it and I will avoid personal remarks and keep discussions strictly about sources and historical evidence. I would like the opportunity to contribute constructively, particularly in areas of history where I have academic background, while adhering to Wikipedia’s policies. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Declined. You have edited logged out and created a sock since this recent batch of appeals, and the logged out edit was exactly for the reason of your block. Izno (talk) 16:31, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, after some time spent fighting and pushing in my own way blinded by my conviction on the matter, finally I understand the proper way to conduct my self on wikipedia. I was using the unlogged account ~2026-23305-69 to continue what I was doing in the same manner before the user Rosguill finally explained to me in a calm manner how to conduct myself on wikipedia and how to follow the rules. I have no intention to sock puppet and want to provide fruitful edits after adequate discussions with other members on the talk pages with this being my one and only account before considering making any edits. I will also always seek the advice and input of a senior if there is the possibility of an edit war happening. I truly think I've made many mistakes so far in my conduct and I hope that I have learned enough to be an adequate member of this community. Please provide me with any additional advice if needed and if I have missed anything. This time I am truly sincere and don't know what else to add. Please teach me if I make mistakes. Thank you.

Per below. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:34, 16 May 2026 (UTC)