User talk:ChulaOne

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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

El_C 14:57, 22 March 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

As with so very many Wikipedia articles, ideologues with an agenda have added wording and outside links designed to attack and demean the subjects of two Wikipedia articles: the one on Dr. Deborah L. Birx and the one on the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Allowing ideologues to successfully block other editors seeking to maintain Wikipedia as a credible source of information is, at the very least, counterproductive.ChulaOne (talk) 15:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're blocked for your actions, not for what someone else did. Once you're unblocked, you can seek dispute resolution. What we need right now, though, is an indication that you understand our policies and will follow them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2020 (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.

with so very many Wikipedia articles, ideologues with an agenda have added wording and outside links designed to attack and demean the subjects of two Wikipedia articles: the one on Dr. Deborah L. Birx and the one on the White House Coronavirus Task Force.

ChulaOne, you editwarred to make (four times) three changes at White House Coronavirus Task Force [1]:

You removed a citation to a reliable source
You installed the word "Dr." in front of Birx, although naming policy on Wikipedia was explained to you
You removed quote marks from a direct quote.

Then, instead of discussing your edits on talk, you made a spurious claim on talk, which amounts to calling me a "troll".

You have made similar edits at Deborah Birx. You have indicated NO "wording and outside links designed to attack and demean the subjects". Since I am pretty much 100% responsible for all of the content at White House Coronavirus Task Force, and there is no chance that I will "attack or demean" those subjects, if you persist in these categorizations, I will consider them a personal attack and ask that your talk page access be revoked. You may not cast aspersions on other editors without providing evidence. Yes, MANY articles on Wikipedia are as you describe; these two are not. At no time since the creation of the article has there been ANY content about Dr. Birx that you dispute except, "Deborah Birx is the response coordinator.[3]" That is not attacking or demeaning. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]