Hi ANTIFA20262ND! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:31, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote I want keep this move non-partisan and have much more weeks of review before closing up.

I think it might be more appropriate to open this conversation up again in a couple of months, after legal issues have been resolved and more reporting has been done. Wikipedia relies on following what the reliable sources have to say about anything for which there is an article. Just linking to the Kennedy Center page doesn't do much to help your argument.

Also, out of curiosity: your name contains the phrase "ANTIFA", and yet you very clearly are not an anti-fascist. Genuinely wondering about that contradiction, what's up with that? What is the inspiration for your Wikipedia editor name? ~2025-40672-28 (talk) 13:55, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

voorts (talk/contributions) 23:26, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. HurricaneZeta^C 01:41, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Direct link to that discussion is here. ~2025-40672-28 (talk) 14:53, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Kennedy Center and Talk:Kennedy Center) for disruptive editing - repeated attempts to relitigate closed RMs and refusal to get the point/Wikilawyering.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:44, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for unwillingness to accept community consensus, apparently not here to contribute to the wider project.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Mfield (Oi!) 04:33, 27 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).

ANTIFA20262ND (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

• I like to request account unblock and will review the guidance again to see what rule I missed and additional ones given by unblocker
• I also like to request unblock from Kennedy Center page and review guidance there too again ANTIFA20262ND (talk) 04:44, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are only blocked from editing Wikipedia. You can still read all pages, including policies and guidance. Please do that first and then go through Guide to appealing blocks to create a new unblock request. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:26, 27 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.

You have exhibited you are either refusing or incapable of accepting your behavior was disruptive, and repeatedly saying "tell me what I did wrong" when you have been told multiple times what you did wrong is also disruptive. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:26, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger: You also block my sockpuppet account ANTIFA20262ND (talk) 07:34, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) You cannot remove declined appeals - feel free to delete everything else if you wish, but the declined appeal must stay in place Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]