Your edit summary says "Species cannot adapt. Ask any scientist. Monkeys don't suddenly go "hey, it's pretty warm, I'll shed my fur!". The climate ADAPTS the animal"
Just the same I may say "climate doesn't suddenly go "hey, y'all monkeys, shed your fur right now!" Regardless, the language is sometimes rather illogical. For starters, you may want to read the wikipedia article " adaptation" , and if you disagree with the language, the talk page Talk:adaptation is a proper place to discuss the usage. But I doubt you will find support there, because adaptation is a trait of an animal (monkey) rather than of the environment (weather). In a certain sense you are right in that climate affects the animal, but it it animal's organism which responds to the effects of the climate. Staszek Lem ( talk) 00:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Please provide references which confirm your changes in spelling, otherwise they will be reverted. Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Celtic/Windos%C4%93baris
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Frankish/Hl%C5%8Ddowig
UtherPendrogn ( talk) 06:51, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
By the way, please re-read the end of the "Welcome!" section about how to sign you posts in talk pages properly. Staszek Lem ( talk) 23:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Fuck, you may be blocked from editing. Muffled Pocketed 11:31, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Artognou stone shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Fuck. CAPTAIN RAJU ( ✉) 12:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doug Weller
talk
15:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The information was pertinent, accurate, and sourced. UtherPendrogn ( talk) 15:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You are blocked for edit warring, in particular running afoul of the three revert rule, not for the contents of your edits. --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 15:33, 27 November 2016 (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.
As it says above, Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.. --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 00:53, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
This edit suggests that you aren't going to be able to work within our policies and guidelines and don't intend to try. Doug Weller talk 06:00, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Also, given your attitude to Scientific facts, I'd hate to see the Wikipedia page for String Theory. Probably barren. UtherPendrogn ( talk) 06:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at WP:ANI, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Boing! said Zebedee (
talk)
11:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I have been aggressed by other users, who have called me an asshole, belittled me, and threatened me, while posting messages specifically to bring me back to the ANI then telling me to leave.
Decline reason:
This doesn't address the reasons for the block. Besides, you have filed a request via UTRS. — DoRD ( talk) 13:28, 1 December 2016 (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.
You are continuing with your attacks on another editor, "it's about adding to the encyclopaedia, which Cagwinn is destroying", long after that editor has been sanctioned for their bad behaviour - and that must stop. The issue with that user has been dealt with and any further problems will also be dealt with in the appropriate manner. Multiple users have repeatedly pleaded with you to drop the stick, and if you will not drop it voluntarily, you will be made to drop it. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:29, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
"Considering that UtherPendrogn has been continuing the attacks on Cagwinn long after the latter was blocked for bad behaviour, will not drop the stick (the most recent was "it's about adding to the encyclopaedia, which Cagwinn is destroying", just above), and has been causing one of the biggest time sinks I've seen in, well, days, I have blocked for 24 hours. Enough is enough, and if this disruptive battleground behaviour continues when the block expires, I will block for longer. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)"
@ Boing! said Zebedee: Are you fucking joking? Boing seems to be the sound your bong made before you wrote that message, not what Zebedee said. He got blocked for EDIT WARRING, he's gone unpunished for threatening and insulting me. UtherPendrogn ( talk) 11:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Triple ( edit conflict) Uther, you need to be patient, refrain from using profanity, and stop taking things so personally. I have not attacked you, nor has Mr rnddude. Your previous block, as Cagwinn's, had nothing whatsoever to do with the content of your edits. If you are going to be unblocked and avoid further blocks, you need to try to understand what it was that you were blocked for. Your above appeal will, as it is currently worded, almost certainly be rejected. I am personally opposed to IBANs, and I would defend you against the above-mentioned IBAN, but it seems like you don't understand why it is being proposed. The only insults and threats you received were in direct response to you actively going out of your way and provoking them. You need to drop the stick, and soon. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 11:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
After the abusive emails you just sent me, I have revoked your ability to use the Wikiepdia email system and I have increased your block to indefinite. If you wish to make any further unblock requests, please use WP:UTRS. If any reviewing admin or Arbcom member wants to see the emails, please send me an email and I'll oblige by return. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #17028 was submitted on Dec 01, 2016 12:03:14. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 12:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #17030 was submitted on Dec 01, 2016 14:02:09. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 14:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Uther, I have to say that I am rather disappointed. You could've gotten off a lot easier if you just dropped the stick. At worst, you both would've been temporarily blocked and banned from each other. The situation didn't have to escalate the way it did. Seeing as the situation appears to be over, this message will probably be the last of my involvement in this case. On that note, I urge you to reconsider your actions if you are unblocked. Dark Knight 2149 19:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Your edit summary says "Species cannot adapt. Ask any scientist. Monkeys don't suddenly go "hey, it's pretty warm, I'll shed my fur!". The climate ADAPTS the animal"
Just the same I may say "climate doesn't suddenly go "hey, y'all monkeys, shed your fur right now!" Regardless, the language is sometimes rather illogical. For starters, you may want to read the wikipedia article " adaptation" , and if you disagree with the language, the talk page Talk:adaptation is a proper place to discuss the usage. But I doubt you will find support there, because adaptation is a trait of an animal (monkey) rather than of the environment (weather). In a certain sense you are right in that climate affects the animal, but it it animal's organism which responds to the effects of the climate. Staszek Lem ( talk) 00:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Please provide references which confirm your changes in spelling, otherwise they will be reverted. Staszek Lem ( talk) 01:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Celtic/Windos%C4%93baris
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Frankish/Hl%C5%8Ddowig
UtherPendrogn ( talk) 06:51, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
By the way, please re-read the end of the "Welcome!" section about how to sign you posts in talk pages properly. Staszek Lem ( talk) 23:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Fuck, you may be blocked from editing. Muffled Pocketed 11:31, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Artognou stone shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Fuck. CAPTAIN RAJU ( ✉) 12:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doug Weller
talk
15:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The information was pertinent, accurate, and sourced. UtherPendrogn ( talk) 15:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You are blocked for edit warring, in particular running afoul of the three revert rule, not for the contents of your edits. --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 15:33, 27 November 2016 (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.
As it says above, Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.. --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 00:53, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
This edit suggests that you aren't going to be able to work within our policies and guidelines and don't intend to try. Doug Weller talk 06:00, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Also, given your attitude to Scientific facts, I'd hate to see the Wikipedia page for String Theory. Probably barren. UtherPendrogn ( talk) 06:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at WP:ANI, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Boing! said Zebedee (
talk)
11:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I have been aggressed by other users, who have called me an asshole, belittled me, and threatened me, while posting messages specifically to bring me back to the ANI then telling me to leave.
Decline reason:
This doesn't address the reasons for the block. Besides, you have filed a request via UTRS. — DoRD ( talk) 13:28, 1 December 2016 (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.
You are continuing with your attacks on another editor, "it's about adding to the encyclopaedia, which Cagwinn is destroying", long after that editor has been sanctioned for their bad behaviour - and that must stop. The issue with that user has been dealt with and any further problems will also be dealt with in the appropriate manner. Multiple users have repeatedly pleaded with you to drop the stick, and if you will not drop it voluntarily, you will be made to drop it. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:29, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
"Considering that UtherPendrogn has been continuing the attacks on Cagwinn long after the latter was blocked for bad behaviour, will not drop the stick (the most recent was "it's about adding to the encyclopaedia, which Cagwinn is destroying", just above), and has been causing one of the biggest time sinks I've seen in, well, days, I have blocked for 24 hours. Enough is enough, and if this disruptive battleground behaviour continues when the block expires, I will block for longer. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)"
@ Boing! said Zebedee: Are you fucking joking? Boing seems to be the sound your bong made before you wrote that message, not what Zebedee said. He got blocked for EDIT WARRING, he's gone unpunished for threatening and insulting me. UtherPendrogn ( talk) 11:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Triple ( edit conflict) Uther, you need to be patient, refrain from using profanity, and stop taking things so personally. I have not attacked you, nor has Mr rnddude. Your previous block, as Cagwinn's, had nothing whatsoever to do with the content of your edits. If you are going to be unblocked and avoid further blocks, you need to try to understand what it was that you were blocked for. Your above appeal will, as it is currently worded, almost certainly be rejected. I am personally opposed to IBANs, and I would defend you against the above-mentioned IBAN, but it seems like you don't understand why it is being proposed. The only insults and threats you received were in direct response to you actively going out of your way and provoking them. You need to drop the stick, and soon. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 11:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
After the abusive emails you just sent me, I have revoked your ability to use the Wikiepdia email system and I have increased your block to indefinite. If you wish to make any further unblock requests, please use WP:UTRS. If any reviewing admin or Arbcom member wants to see the emails, please send me an email and I'll oblige by return. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #17028 was submitted on Dec 01, 2016 12:03:14. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 12:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
UtherPendrogn ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
UTRS appeal #17030 was submitted on Dec 01, 2016 14:02:09. This review is now closed.
-- UTRSBot ( talk) 14:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Uther, I have to say that I am rather disappointed. You could've gotten off a lot easier if you just dropped the stick. At worst, you both would've been temporarily blocked and banned from each other. The situation didn't have to escalate the way it did. Seeing as the situation appears to be over, this message will probably be the last of my involvement in this case. On that note, I urge you to reconsider your actions if you are unblocked. Dark Knight 2149 19:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)