User talk:BeyonderGod

Please don't leave unwanted (rude,hateful, and etc.) comments on my page or you'll be reported.

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello. I am Beyonder and i am here to welcome you to Wikipedia! are you New to Wikipedia? Introduction if you aren't then please read Privacy Policy and About Wikipedia! Please enjoy your day and happy editing! Beyonder (talk) 13:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)BeyonderGod

Your editing continues to be disruptive and unconstructive, in various ways, including, but not restricted to, the following. You persist in editing contrary to consensus, refusing to accept that any consensus that you disagree with is in fact a consensus. You take a confrontational attitude, rather than a collaborative attitude, to editors with whom you disagree. You persistently edit-war, despite twice having been blocked for doing so, and having been warned about it on a number of occasions, from December 2014 to March 2016. To give just one example of your edit-warring, your edits to Living Tribunal on 15 March 2016 have attempted to restore several pieces of content essentially the same as content which you have added to the article at various times from June 2014 onwards. (I say "essentially" the same, because such trivial changes as using "Virtually Omnipotent" instead of "Nigh-Omnipotent" do not detract from the nature of what you are doing.) You persistently appear to fail to hear what other editors say to you whenever what they say does not fit in with your views, so that you waste people's time and stretch their patience by repeating the same points which have already been answered, and by responding to things which have not been said, but which you seem to imagine have been said, instead of responding to what actually has been said. You are fully aware of the extent to which your editing is contrary to consensus among other editors, having been repeatedly told about other editors' opinions, and having yourself taken part in the relevant discussions, but you simply dismiss that, and, as I have already indicated, seem to think that any consensus which you think is wrong simply isn't a consensus, or somehow doesn't count. You are either unable or unwilling to look at your own behaviour and accept responsibility for your own actions, blaming others for consequences of what you do.

I told you on the 11th of March that continuing in the same way would be "likely to lead to being blocked, very probably for much longer than either of the two short blocks you have received in the past, since short blocks have failed to persuade you to change your approach." Following that, you have, as I have already indicated, continued your very long-term edit-warring at Living Tribunal. After that, the only remaining question was how long the block should be. Some of the things you say seem to suggest that you may be sincerely unable to understand what the problems with your editing are, in which case it may be that you will never be able to improve, so that you should be blocked indefinitely. However, I hope that will not be necessary, and in order to give you a chance to improve if you can, I have limited the block to one month. I advise you during the time of the block to carefully re-read the messages that editors have written, both on this page and on other pages, about the problems with your editing. Think about what they say, think about how you have edited, and try to understand what about your editing has led other editors to have concerns. Even if you don't agree with all of the concerns, understanding them should help you to have a better idea of how to deal with those concerns in future, and to sort out differences cooperatively. If you can manage to achieve that, you should be able to avoid further, perhaps even longer, blocks. I hope you can.

If you believe there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:22, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Unblock

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

BeyonderGod

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=BeyonderGod |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=BeyonderGod |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=BeyonderGod |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}