Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-32744161-20181025123329/@comment-1073312-20181026220334

It is brilliant you have carefully considered the warnings and suggestions that were presented to you. You have made it clear that you want to seek conflict resolution in the future. But I'm going to clarify on these two: You *are* encouraged to make bold edits on SporeWiki, obviously when a creature or taxon's owner isn't there and you think there's a problem with it, it would be impractical to seek high consensus for every such edit. You should seek consensus with the owner or community if your edit has been disputed. You are also encouraged to seek community consensus if you want to implement a major change across taxa or templates (which is related to being clear about your proposals).
 * Not make any edits to a taxon page without a high level of consensus, or to remove blatant vandalism.
 * Never classify a taxon without a high level of consensus.

In situations where project members are deciding whether to bar a member or an accept an appeal, the project members also make a consensus, whatever it is. It appears that your appeal is rejected this time. It might be because the community regards you as having chances before when you were warned, and when you returned after your block.

What I suggest you should do is make contributions to other SporeWiki projects, and maybe gain some trust? Would joining the fiction universe interest you? There's lots of main namespace stuff that needs improving. We could also let you know when we have the time to start the template overhaul.

Perhaps in time, you could ask members of the Taxonomy project to help them, or to do some editing of your own choice (agreed upon by everyone to avoid misunderstanding). If you perform well and cooperatively, you have much stronger case for appeal.