Arealprize

J.O. Patterson, Sr.

Hey - saw you made some edits to J.O. Patterson, Sr. Could you add more sources to make sure the article is referenced ? It looks like previous editors didn't source any data. --RichardMills65 (talk) 06:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Richard I added source: www.JOPattersonMinistry.Com and listed the names of 3 books: "Prodigal Son, Child of The King", "A Day In The Life", and "Player's School". which can be foun on www.Amazon.com www.Google.Com or pretty much any bookstore in America. However there was a front page articule in: Tri State Defender, news paper in Memphis , Tennessee on November 4th & 11th., 1990 which Benjamin Jimerson-Phillips identity was disclosed.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Circeus YOU HAVE UNJUSTLY PLACED A BLOCK ON MY IP ADDRESS, I have been blocked repeatedly and on multipule times had my submissions removed, I have listed information about J.O. Patterson Sr.; verifiable Information documented in 3 book and several magazine and news paper articules. Please remove this block from my IP address 69.171.160.0/24 so that I may continue making contributions and help in sharing productive and useful information to the site

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; unblock requests of this type should use the {{unblock-auto}} template; we have no way of knowing which IP block to lift otherwise. — Daniel Case (talk) 12:14, 12 March 2012 (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 currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia. You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, move, or create them. Editing from 69.171.160.0/24 has been disabled by Circeus for the following reason(s):

persistant returning blocked user This block has been set to expire: 18:09, 27 August 2012.

Even if blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page and contact other editors and administrators by e-mail.

Note: Please use the [show] links across from each header to show more information.

A few words of advice

I see no evidence anywhere that the administrator who placed the block is a representative of "The Church of God In Christ". Also, if the block was because you were inserting information that the organisation doesn't want known, then I wonder why they have left your edits in place, when they could easily have reverted them, taking advantage of the fact that you are blocked and can't restore those edits. The range that has been blocked has recently been the source of a huge amount of disruptive editing by an editor who has evaded blocks on accounts, and everything I have seen in the course of investigating this case looks exactly as though that is the reason for the block. It would be possible to give your account IP block exemption. However, that is usually done for accounts that have a significant history of constructive editing. I suggest reading the guide to appealing blocks, particularly the section Talk about yourself, not others, and then rewriting your unblock request. If it comes across as a rational, measured request from a constructive editor it will stand a better chance of success than if it comes across as an angry rant by someone who thinks that everything they do on Wikipedia is opposed by some sort of grand conspiracy against them. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for you advice, I greatly appreciate it. But I must add, this is the first time my edits have not been removed, they have been removed about 5 other times. However you are correct, I should not be so quice to assume that there are outside elements involved. arealprize (talk)

No edits from this account "have been removed about 5 other times", so have you edited with one or more other accounts? If so, what accounts? JamesBWatson (talk) 11:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

if I am understanding correctly the block which effects me was for a range of ip addresses, since to my understanding my individual ip address has not violated any policy of the site

Accept reason:

It appears from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive233#Need someone with experience in rangeblocks that the block on the IP range has been softened to "anon only", and from this that you are indeed able to edit again. Favonian (talk) 21:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I am not very internet savy, so there may be issues you are telling me of that I am not understanding. My work is that I am a nationally published author of several book, and a producer of television & motion pictures. I have much that I would like to contribute to the sight to help in adding more accurate information on the celebrities and individules I personally know and have relationships with. Please give additional review, if your decision is to keep the block I will except that decision until the time it is set to expire.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing, and block evasion. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)