Ed.Vallejo

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, Ed.Vallejo. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Also worthwhile acquainting yourself with the functions of global user pages. Happy editing!

 — billinghurst sDrewth 00:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

I am an independent Reporter, Journalist and authorized Spokesperson for AXJ.NEWS.

I would appreciate it if: Vituzzu unblocks me so that I can begin contributing.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ed.Vallejo (talk)

Comment You can edit here, so you are not blocked. If you are talking about an account that may represent an organisation, then quite possibly it will be blocked as many of the wikis don't allow such accounts. If you wish to discuss things with Vituzzu, then please use their user talk page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:58, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Please take better care when editing other pages. As you edited my user talk page, and here, you are clearly NOT blocked. So best that you talk to Vituzzu about your difficulties.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:20, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

I have looked at your crosswiki contributions, and all I can say is that it is akin to unuseful spam activity. None of your account blocks have been undertaken by Vituzzu, they are each by different individuals. If you continue that way, you are just going to get account(s) locked, and be sent to oblivion. These wikis all have scope and purpose, and you are operating outside the scope. What are you expecting to occur? Being a journalist gives you no special rights to edit out of scope.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:27, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Comment Thank you so much. I have just recently started publishing on Wiki and have yet not had time to read all the guidelines but think that since we were created in 1998 we should have an entry in Wiki. We operate as a non-profit similar to Wiki and our Members also support Wiki. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ed.Vallejo (talk)

Each wiki has their inclusion criteria, and each wiki manages their contributions and contributors. You will need to resolve your issues at the specific wikis. This is not the place.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:28, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Comment Thank you so much. Is there such a thing as a central Wiki exclusively for Reporters to publish on?

No, why would there be something exclusive? We do have Wikinews family of sites, why not look there? Noting though that would be you as an individual, not as part of an organisation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:53, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes I am reviewing the different Wiki websites now but I am reading information and alleged "news" that is more "opinions" than fact. Mostly regarding politics. For example we are following Jim Acosta News, Reporter for CNN. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ed.Vallejo (talk)

You may be a reporter, however, your decisions and actions are unwise. You have to keep creating out of scope pages, and being insulting. Well, with all your other blocks, you just are not worth rescuing. I will be blocking your account.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:45, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Who has been insulted? I disagree with your opinions and would like other Admins at Wiki with a neutral point of view to review my posts.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ed.Vallejo (talk)

Unblock request declined This blocked user has had their unblock request reviewed by one or more administrators, who has/have reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Request reason: There is no reason to block me other than an obvious bias against independent reporters and journalists. Decline reason: What a load of hogwash. You are blocked as you promote your organisation, insult stewards by creating pages calling them idiots, and create out-of-topic pages. It is why you were blocked at the other wikis. You don't learn.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:36, 9 December 2018 (UTC) বাংলা | English | español | français | magyar | italiano | 한국어 | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | українська | 中文 | edit

block log gblock log blocklist stalktoy guc unblock gunblock contribs: +/-

“ Why are you blocking me? Do you have something against freedom of speech and of the press?

We have appealed to the Administrators to review your activities.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Administrators

-- This email was sent by Ed.Vallejo to Billinghurst by the "Email this user" function at Meta. If you reply to this email, your email will be sent directly to the original sender, revealing your email address to them.

” — Ed.Vallejo, email

We are analyzing the Jim Acosta page.

We are analyzing the Jim Acosta page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Acosta— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ed.Vallejo (talk)

• @Billinghurst:Does the above warrant a revocation of TPA?--Cohaf (talk) 07:08, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

{{unblock}}

• Comment Any admin further reviewing this unblock request please note Special:Contributions/Ed.Vallejo, Special:CentralAuth/Ed.Vallejo and Special:DeletedContributions/Ed.Vallejo, and user page history. As noted above I do not endorse an unblock, though would enter a conversation. I do not see that this user is able to understand our scope and to edit within it with this section as evidence. It is my opinion that they are not listening.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:25, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

I have expressed my opinion regarding the un-called for blocking policy being applied without a justification on Wikimedia.

As a result of expressing my opinion one individual has decided to block me from expressing that opinion violating not only freedom of speech and of the press, but labling simple reproduction of a wiki comment "vandalism"? The source and the author are obvious. Can we not agree on a certain opinion or point of view before an entry is published on Wikimedia?— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ed.Vallejo (talk)

• stop casting aspersions.--Cohaf (talk) 07:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
• I know different Wikimedia/pedia projects have different rules, but the different language encyclopedias are not intended to offer a free-speech or freedom-of-the-press platform, and nor is meta. They are all run under the T&Cs of the Wikimedia foundation (which is a private charitable organization) and also under each individual project's rules aimed towards facilitating each project's purpose.

  As for unblocking this account, I must point out that we have already had socking at en.wiki with a new account after this one was renamed from en:User:AXJNEWS - see en:User talk:AXJ.NEWS. This is someone who clearly will not listen to what they're being told and who insists on trying to use Wikimedia projects for their own ends, and I would recommend not unblocking here on meta as their actions and intent appear to be outside of meta's scope (and I would strongly oppose unblock at en.wiki). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

"Socking"? I am just a Reporter and Journalist for AXJ.NEWS. What is the issue? WIKILEAKS belongs to Julian Assange and he is presently residing in the Embassy of Ecuador in London. AXJ.NEWS simply reports on that. What is the issue with you guys?— The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2600:1700:8610:6620:f176:b5e0:e57a:4d44 (talk)

There's nothing wrong with AXJ.NEWS reporting on that - AXJ.NEWS can report on whatever it likes, through its own channels. It's just that Wikipedia is not an outlet for your reporting or for seeking publicity for AXJ.NEWS. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:03, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

• The above seems to be a block evasion.--Cohaf (talk) 16:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)