User talk:12.7.202.2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Teabagging. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

February 2010[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page National debt by U.S. presidential terms has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. FASTILYsock(TALK) 20:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

March 2010[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Teabagger has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Teabagger. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Please proposed any article splitting on the Teabagging talk page before you create duplicate articles. Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 22:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Nuvola apps important.svg Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Teabagger. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Teabagger[edit]

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Uncle Dick (talk) 22:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is your final warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:68.25.103.189.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, 12.7.202.2. You have new messages at Ronhjones's talk page.
Message added 23:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

May 2010[edit]

Do not remove speedy deletion templates without fully addressing the concern. You have proven to be disruptive over the topic area and need to stop. I assume this is not intentional. If you do not understand Wikipedia standards you should request some feedback by using the talk page instead of making overly bold changes.Cptnono (talk) 23:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

per template "Please remove this template if a rationale is provided." 12.7.202.2 (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
You did not provide a FUR. You filled out the permission section. It is not a FUR for the article it is being used on. Even if you did provide a FUR there would be other issues. You need to read the links provided in the template and see the reasoning provided on the talk page. If you do not reinsert the tag.Cptnono (talk) 23:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I've inserted the Non-free review tag. 12.7.202.2 (talk) 23:39, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
You did that incorrectly as well. You needed to start the discussion by inserting a header at that page.Cptnono (talk) 23:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Per the discussion of the image at Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:FreeRepublicTeaBag.jpg, I have opened up a sockpuppet investigation that involves you. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JustGettingItRight Cptnono (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
You are already being discussed at SPI. Do not revert that many edits without joining in the conversations. If you do it again you will also have a report at ANI filed and you will more than likely be blocked for persistent disruptive behavior.Cptnono (talk) 20:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Stop being disruptive then.Cptnono (talk) 20:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010[edit]

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. EyeSerenetalk 16:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

12.7.202.2 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

This address is being stalked by what appears to be at least two school-boys. I have the right to undo any number of vandalisms here.

Decline reason:

That doesn't appear to be a reason to unblock this ip address. Also, the block notice is not vandalism, and it needs to remain in place so that other users sharing this ip will understand why they are not able to edit. If it would help, I'll be happy to disable talk page editing to this ip. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:37, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and 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.

Why, specifically, was this address blocked? -12.7.202.2 (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The Hyperbole complaint was reversion of IP vandalism for which another Admin issued a warning to the IP. The Sunscreen controversy was progressive edits to address wp:Copy which edits were ultimately accepted. Neither were wp:3RR. The main complainant above is someone I reported previously as a stalker. His failure to read the edit logs carefully is an ongoing problem that he's apparently sucked you in with. Please reread those logs and deal with him. -12.7.202.2 (talk) 17:50, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Plain and simple edit-warring from multiple IPs. In my opinion, your main account should be blocked indefinitely as well. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:05, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
I've been exacting and scrupulous to avoid wp:3RR. Please reread the logs I refer to above, since that is the reason for this block. There is not one single instance from the logs above of 3RR that I can find involving any of the blocked accounts collectively. Without that, accusations of edit-warring and SOCK are without basis, except old history which is not, and should not be, the basis of this block. There is no "edit-warring from multiple IPs" or SOCK, if those IPs, collectively, have broken no rules. Properly learned behavior should be not be punished, but those stoking old resentment for short-term editing gains should be investigated. -12.7.202.2 (talk) 18:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
FYI: The edits to Sunscreen controversy have not been accepted; I placed an "unbalanced" template there. See Talk:Sunscreen controversy#Article section "2010" for my reason. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It's accepted as a reliable report of a controversial study. As you say, whether it's scientifically accepted remains to be seen, but it's not our purpose, as editors, to determine that, only report reliably what notable others say. -12.7.202.2 (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
For the last time, AOL news is not a reliable source for medical issues. The relevant section, Wikipedia:RSMED#Popular press, really says all there is to say about the matter.--ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 07:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

12.7.202.2 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Please reread the recent edit logs that are the claimed basis for this block. There is not one instance of 3RR, even collectively, or vote-stacking, without which the other accusations are baseless. OhNoitsJamie might recuse himself.

Decline reason:

What you regretfully neglect is that WP:EW does not require you to cross the 3RR threshold. Your edits also have not met WP:CONSENSUS, and border on WP:FRINGE. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and 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.

I should recuse myself because you don't like my opinion? Sorry. I did recuse editing privileges from one of your other IPs, however. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#IP evading block Cptnono (talk) 23:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Enough edit-warring[edit]

That's enough back-and-forth. I've protected this page for three days. –xenotalk 17:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Blocked 1 month pending resolution of SPI[edit]

Provisionally blocked for one month pending the resolution of this SPI request. Other users using this IP should log in, or request an account by emailing unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org. –xenotalk 17:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Per results, extended to 1 year to be refreshed as needed. Syrthiss (talk) 11:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)