User talk:~2025-38922-09

Regarding your recent edits

Hello,

I’ve recently reverted your edits on the Level crossings by country along with a handful of other edits on other articles such as your removal of the North Korea stop sign image file on the Stop sign article.

My reasoning for reverting your edits are either because they lack sources or as I mentioned on your other temporary account’s talk page relied on sources that were just Google Street View images.

Being “sad” or because “I like it” aren’t justifiable reasons to add/reinstate content. Wikipedia has a policy against original research which means that content needs a reliable source rather than exclusively first hand accounts of information.

Going from here I highly recommend reviewing original research policy along with the disruptive editing behavioral guidelines. There are also plenty of Wikipedia admins who would be more than happy to help you out with understanding Wikipedia policies and guidelines and they would probably do a better job at explaining it than I could.

I sometimes re-review Wikipedia policies and guidelines myself as I don’t always get it 100% right.

P.S

At least one of your restorations to the Level crossings by country article included non-neutral language which Wikipedia has a policy against along with the re-addition of video game related (Roblox) which isn’t relevant to the article. I didn’t focus too much on those re-additions in this talk page topic because I think those were added by a different editor a while back. Roadgeek75 (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Roblox sources aren't mine, They're someone else's, And i'm sorry for the reverting. ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 16:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Roadgeek75. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Don't do that again unless you want to get blocked. Ad Orientem (talk) 17:11, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I won't do it again, Please unblock me. 🥺😭🥺😭🥺😭🥺😭 ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~You're not blocked, but you will be if you aren't kinder to other people.~~ We can't let people say mean things just because they're annoyed, that's not ok here.

Please read our Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors, I think it'll really help you understand what's going on and know what to do next time, ok? Blue Sonnet (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm sorry, but please unblock me from editing. ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 17:12, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Roadgeek75 (talk) 17:14, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @~2025-38922-09, can I please ask you to take a look at Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors - I think it might be really helpful? Blue Sonnet (talk) 20:58, 11 December 2025 (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).

~2025-38922-09 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry for being rude, Please unblock me from editing. ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 17:13, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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. Yamla (talk) 17:40, 12 December 2025 (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).

~2025-38922-09 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have read the blocking policy and understand why I was blocked. I sincerely apologize for [saying "I WISH YOU WERE DEAD"], and I assure you I will follow Wikipedia's [mention relevant policies, e.g., neutrality, civility] policies moving forward, please accept, let's be friends again, ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Don't pull this chatbot garbage. It's offensive. Yamla (talk) 18:05, 12 December 2025 (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.

It's unclear to me if you lack sufficient competence to edit here, or if you are deliberately wasting our time. Please note that you'll likely get exactly one more unblock request before losing access to your talk page, so make it count. Make sure you have thoroughly read and understood WP:GAB before you make your request. That request absolutely must address (1) your persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content, (2) your edit warring, (3) your personal attacks, and should address (4) your use of multiple temporary accounts instead of a single account (see WP:SOCK). I want to be clear, an unblock request that doesn't address at least the first three of these will be taken as evidence that you are deliberately wasting our time or that you simply can't understand what you are being told. --Yamla (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2025 (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).

~2025-38922-09 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Alright, I read the guide to appealing blocks page and I understood, Now please can i get unblocked? 😟 ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 18:22, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As you are unable or unwilling to address the points raised, I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 12 December 2025 (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.

Are you absolutely sure that unblock request addresses the first three points I raised above? Absolutely sure? If you are not, now is the time to remove your open unblock request. If, however, you are absolutely sure you specifically addressed the points I raised, please say so. --Yamla (talk) 18:24, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm sure. ~2025-38922-09 (talk) 18:27, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll extend the block and revoke talk page access. --Yamla (talk) 18:31, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked because an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.