1. I understand that my previous actions were driven by frustration, and I sincerely apologize for any disruption this may have caused. Moving forward, I assure you that I will refrain from engaging in edit wars 2. The reason for my enraged actions was the significance of including Aeromexico Flight 498 as a reference within the context of pointing out the last jet airliner collision in the U.S. before the recent American Airlines Flight 5342 midair collision. Despite my attempts to add it, the reference was repeatedly removed due to "no consensus." I created a talk page to discuss this, but the lack of engagement and disagreement from others was extremely frustrating. Aeromexico Flight 498 was the last instance of a jet airliner being involved in a midair collision in the U.S., making it a significant event worthy of mention. Ryke001 (talk) 05:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We do not consider chatbot-generated unblock requests. GPTZero score: 100%. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My previous actions were driven by frustration, and I apologize for any disruption this may have caused. Moving forward, I will refrain from engaging in edit warring 2. Part of the reason I acted out of rage was because of how obvious it was that the last jet airliner collision in the U.S. before the recent American Airlines Flight 5342 midair collision was Aeromexico Flight 498. It is so frustrating that people seem to not care and disagree. I literally can't think of any other midair collisions involving jet airliners in the U.S. since this D.C. accident. Removing this information is baffling, as it again was the last significant midair collision involving a jet airliner in the U.S.Ryke001 (talk) 20:47, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to describe what steps you will take to control your rage and how you will handle disputes and criticism related to your edits in the future. Note that you are only blocked from Article space. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the steps I will do to refrain from edit warring again: 1: When I get frustrated, I'll actually pause and take a moment to calm down before responding. 2: I’ll make sure to stick to the community guidelines and listen to the decisions made by admins and other editors. 3: Instead of outright editing immediately, I’ll use the talk pages more often to discuss any issues. This is a response to getting declined earlier, Thanks for considering my request. Ryke001 (talk) 13:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 20:54, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]