User talk:YushanLi 33

Welcome![edit]

Hello YushanLi 33! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

April 2021[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Center for China and Globalization has been reverted.
Your edit here to Center for China and Globalization was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.cgtn.com/opinions/commentator/gao-zhikai.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm XLinkBot. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Center for China and Globalization have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links.
Your edit here to Center for China and Globalization was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.cgtn.com/opinions/commentator/gao-zhikai.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 06:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to censor or remove encyclopedic content based on the fact that it is offensive to some readers, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not censored, and attempts to censor encyclopedic content will be regarded as vandalism. Amigao (talk) 12:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Center for China and Globalization. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it.
Your edit here to Center for China and Globalization was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.cgtn.com/opinions/commentator/gao-zhikai.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 13:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

YushanLi 33, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi YushanLi 33! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021[edit]

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Center for China and Globalization) for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:45, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oshwah, unfortunately, it looks there has not been any change in behavior here. - Amigao (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amigao - That's too bad. I wish that they would've read policy and learned from the block. It's been extended to a two week block. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Center for China and Globalization) for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:19, 28 April 2021 (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).

YushanLi 33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Oshwah, thank you for your help. However, I don't think it's appropriate to ban my editing rights. It should be pointed out that this editorial war was not initiated by our side. Although I have little editing experience, I have been learning. In this edition, I used reliable references, but they were completely ignored. I have tried to communicate with Amigao, but I don't think my contribution is respected by the other party, because my contribution has been deleted for no reason. These can be seen from the editing history. I hope you will give me another chance to have a discussion with Amigao.

Decline reason:

This request does not address your edit warring, which is not acceptable regardless of if your edits were correct or not. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 06:30, 28 April 2021 (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.

"I hope you will give me another chance to have a discussion with Amigao." - You have discussions with other editors on talk pages, not in articles. You're missing the point of where the partial block restrains you. Cabayi (talk) 06:52, 28 April 2021 (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).

YushanLi 33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't think I started an editorial war. It should be pointed out that it is Amigao who has been deleting my contributions over the past few days. He doesn't seem to be under any restraint.

Decline reason:

No reason given to unblock. Cabayi (talk) 08:36, 28 April 2021 (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).

YushanLi 33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am willing to accept a 2 week ban on editing.However, I think it is unreasonable and unacceptable that the responsibility should only be borne by me. I hope to get a reasonable explanation on how to restrain Amigao's behavior. Otherwise, this will continue to happen, which could not be solved just by limiting my editing right.

Decline reason:

Again, this is not an unblock request. Stop abusing the unblock template. Yamla (talk) 10:41, 28 April 2021 (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 should be pointed out that this editorial war was not initiated by our side. During the process of edition of the CCG page, I used reliable references, but they were completely ignored.I think it is unreasonable and unacceptable that the responsibility should only be borne by me. I hope to get a reasonable explanation on how to restrain Amigao's behavior. Otherwise, this will continue to happen, which could not be solved just by limiting my editing right. |decline = Again, this is not an unblock request. Stop abusing the unblock template.

You have been blocked from editing certain areas of the encyclopedia for a period of 1 month for block evasion. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Cabayi (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using a sockpuppet account to evade your block will lead to increasing sanctions, most likely an indefinite total block. I've extended your partial block by a month. Please don't do it again. w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/YushanLi 33 Cabayi (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2021 (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).

YushanLi 33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Do not understand what are you talking about, would you please give me more explanation on that?

Decline reason:

A completely new editor, who first request is to make the exact edit you have been trying to make while you are blocked? That's as clear as day to me. I would advise you do not do this again. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:48, 11 May 2021 (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.

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/YushanLi 33. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 08:13, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]