User talk:MilkAndStrawberryPutin

Welcome, MilkAndStrawberryPutin!

Welcome to Wikipedia, MilkAndStrawberryPutin! I'm I dream of horses, and I've been assigned as your mentor. About half of new Wikipedia accounts receive a mentor chosen randomly from a list of volunteers. It just means I'm here to help with anything you need! We need to have all kinds of people working together to create an online encyclopedia, so I'm glad you're here. Over time, you will figure out what you enjoy doing the most on Wikipedia.

You might have noticed that you have access to a tutorial and suggested edits. It's recommended that you take advantage of this, as it'll make learning how to edit Wikipedia easier.

If you need assistance with anything or have any questions, click on the "Get editing help" button on the bottom right corner of your screen. This will open up a module with links to help pages and a place to ask me questions. You can also ask me questions directly on my talk page, or go here to get help from the wider community.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the reason why @PhilKnight reverted your edit here is because you removed a wikilink without an edit summary. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i remove wiki link because it was first time editing and I was seeing how it works by making random useless edit MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 02:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

btw do you ban neo-nazis and homophobic people on this platform. Please tell me you do MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 02:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If they start expressing those views on here then yes, it generally ends up in a ban. If they happen to hold those kind of views but keep them to themselves and edit collaboratively and respectfully, that's kind of ok - having lots of different perspectives makes for a more neutral encyclopaedia, which is one of our key aims. But more often than not, people who hold those views aren't able to stay respectful and civil for long. We take civility very seriously, and we don't tolerate personal attacks. Wikipedia is a very inclusive community, provided editors demonstrate competence.

Anyway, welcome in! I stumbled across you because one of our bots picked up the "Putin" in your name and flagged it as a possible cause for concern. I think it's probably ok but if you want to consider changing it, have a look at WP:RENAME. It's probably better to do that sooner rather than later so that people get to know your new username instead of this one.

Happy editing! Waggers TALK 15:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page Jimmy Chérizier should be renamed to Jimmy "barbecue" Chérizier MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 00:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of like how the page about cartel guy El Chapo is called (Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán) the page has his real name and nickname in the title, the same should be done with Jimmy Chérizier MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Hello, I'm Classicwiki. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Jimmy Chérizier, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 22:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I'll add a source. Didn't even realize you're the one who undid the original edit and didn't see your edit summary. MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024 (2)

It may be necessary for us to take a trip to ANI. I would ask that you review WP:NPA and remove your multiple personal attacks on the talk page of Jimmy Chérizier. Accusing someone of lying for no reason is a blockable offense. There are norms on en.wp, both in terms of RS and behavior. You are currently over the line in terms of both. Insofar as you make it seem that you are young (use of "bruh" and other internet slang), I am being particularly tolerant and bending over backwards to give you a chance to get a handle on expected behavior here. This will not continue if the behavior does not change. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 01:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks? What? Also you were lying, you said Hitler was elected when he was appointed, you won't admit Jimmy Barbecue is a politician by definition. A reliable source calls him a politician. Also I am young, I'm 19, how does that have to do with anything. I keep saying "bruh" because I personally viewed this argument as pathetic, because you keep wanting to fight with me and stress me out just because of 1 edit I made. Like bro I already said I care about Jimmy Barbecue and this article more than anything. MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 02:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"This will not continue if the behavior does not change." Good!!! I don't want this to continue, I want you to stop and move on already. This has lasted for 2 days, this argument has. For 48 hours, and it's stupid. MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 02:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's simple, retract your attacks and accept that your preferred text does not have consensus. A lie is deliberate... a mistake is not deliberate... as you get older, you'll realize that to err is human, it is not malign. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 09:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:49, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 20:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm here to build an encyclopedia. Here's what happened. I won on the talk page. You only got 1 editor supporting his removal of politician in the Jimmy barbecue page. Another anonymous editor reverted his edit when he tried to remove "politician". He told me to send a reliable source that calls barbecue a politician and I did. Then he asked for 10 sources and kept on wanting to fight with me for no reason for days and days. If jimmy barbecue isn't a politician why wasn't anyone Undoing my edit besides him and 1 supporter. SashiRolls was the one edit warring and constantly disrupting the barbecue page @SashiRolls MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Continuing to argue that your edit-warring was justified and push the blame onto others is not a valid reason to unblock you and allow you to return to it. And the record shows that SashiRolls was far from being the only editor to reverse your edits. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:31, 31 March 2024 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

so the decline reason last time was "And the record shows that SashiRolls was far from being the only editor to reverse your edits". What does David mean by far from the only editor to revert my edits. It was just Sashi and another person. I got 1 person supporting my edits and Sashi got 1 editor supporting his. Also I said my edits were justified because I provided a reliable source that calls barbecue a politician like Sashi said. I showed a definition that matches was barbecue does. Yet the argument didn't end. But whatever. If I get unblocked I promise to stop editing the Jimmy barbecue page and to edit something else but not to edit war. The reason why I put to the blame on him was because I was mad because I did everything Sashi told me to do to keep the word "politician" on the barbecue page but he still wanted to remove it. I promise I won't overreact again. MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 20:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your promise would be more believable if you didn't also try to justify your inappropriate actions. 331dot (talk) 22:13, 31 March 2024 (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.

Hey MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 23:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

ok this is the last time I'm going to appeal this block because I'm probably going to get banned from talking on my talk page, but the last decline reason was from 331dot that said "Your promise would be more believable if you didn't also try to justify your inappropriate actions." Ok so I admit my actions were inappropriate, I shouldn't have overreacted like I did, I should've not called sashi a liar when they accidently get something wrong, I should've been considering what other editors were feeling and I should've not been selfish thinking about what I only want on a page, I should've been nicer and less rude by constantly saying "bruh" when I got annoyed. And I shouldn't revert people's edits so much, I should've discussed more on the talk page. If you don't wanna unban me then that's fine. If you do unban me I won't act rude anymore. MilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 23:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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. Yamla (talk) 12:49, 4 May 2024 (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.

You may have only unblock request open at a time.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

apparently my last block appeal was rejected because no administrator reviewed my block appeal when it's been up for weeks. I said my last block appeal was going to be my last, but I guess I'll try one more time. Can I please be unblocked, I only got to edit wikipedia a few days before getting blocked and editing is fun. I promise not to get frustrated on the talk page anymore. Can you please give me one more chance, if you do I'll be more patience with people and if multiple people don't like my edit, I won't have the debate for days wasting people's times like I did, and I promise not to be childish anymore and throw a fit when I don't get my way. Also my name has "Putin" in it because I'm Russian-American and was proud of my to heritage, I really didn't know too much about Putin so when admins warned me about my name, I was shocked because I didn't know Putin was considered a bad guy, I'm not big into politics except for World War II history and Haitian and Japanese politics. Trust me , I love wikis and I'm here to build an encyclopedia, and to make wikipedia even better. I only got to edit for a few days, please give me a chance, I know how to act now, I promise not to slip up, and if i even made a slight mistake, block me instantly, i don't wanna cause distressMilkAndStrawberryPutin (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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. Yamla (talk) 19:02, 19 June 2024 (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.