User talk:108.184.141.105

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed:

108.184.141.105 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • change block settings • unblock)

---

Request reason:

I'm a US physician updating a page based on Victorian literature. It's insulting you would say I'm adding nonsense/gibbering.

throw the book at

So where is the specific 1800s source you are trying to cite? You added the text "[1]" which looks like a reference, but no actual reference was provided. Equinox ◑ 01:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Dickens' The Cricket on the Hearth. 108.184.141.105 18:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

There's a big difference between "throw the book at" as a figure of speech referring to prosecuting to the maximum extent possible, and as a literal reference to physically hurling a physical book. The latter has no more business in a dictionary than "drop a book on someone's big toe", and you were treating it as if it were the origin of the figure of speech. Instead of asking why it was reverted, you kept on trying to add it back. Personally, I would have blocked you for edit warring or disruptive edits, but I agree with the block. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:18, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Not once does that book use the words "throw the book at" despite you putting them in quotes. If you keep adding fabricated content, you will be blocked again. — surjection ⟨??⟩ 11:31, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Except it's the origin of the phrase, and your rudeness doesn't change that. The phrase represents an overreaction to a perceived malfeasance. Would you say the phrase "jump the shark" has literally nothing to do with riding a jetski over a shark? Phrases come from places, this is no different. An attempt to update a page literally only you care about to something more accurate is being met with you being condescending and ignorant. Do better. 108.184.141.105 02:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)