User talk:99.238.74.216

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

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but you may want to consider creating an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (99.238.74.216) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! —Microchip08 (talk) 20:57, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Chris Ryan's Strike Back, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that.

Categories are specific. If it is a film category then only films go there. If you want a TV series based one then create an account and make one yourself.

☾Loriendrew☽ (talk) 02:04, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Rubbish.
If there is a "Films of the Crimean War" category, and someone adds a TV show there, 99.9% of readers will be saying, "Great. Something new about Crimea", and then there'll be you saying "TV is not film. TV not film. TV <> film." As though that matters one whit.
You are only deleting this categorization to get your bloody edit credit, so why don't you get the edit credit by creating the category yourself.
Try doing something constructive SINCE THAT IS WHAT I AM DOING.
You are doing sweet ef all.
99.238.74.216 (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Information icon Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Bernhard Goetz has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. NeilN talk to me 00:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
The guy was a hero 30 years ago, and he still is. Where's the problem?
99.238.74.216 (talk) 17:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and not to expound on your views of the subject. --NeilN talk to me 17:02, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
And the only ones who will ever see it are the ones who care enough about the topic to edit the article and read the history.
So it is essentially a moot point.
99.238.74.216 (talk) 22:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Information icon Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Community project[edit]

Hi there, this edit where you rudely dismiss another editor with the summary "Butt out" may have been a lapse of judgment on your part. It happens sometimes, but please keep in mind that Wikipedia is a community project, and all constructive members are welcome to contribute. There is no article ownership and civility is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:33, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Likewise I wasn't "claiming ownership" when I reverted your tagging of Oxford Brookes University. As I explained, there isn't really a problem - of the 58 citations only 6 are bare urls. Sionk (talk) 13:41, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

ONLY 6 ARE BARE. ONLY 6. 99.238.74.216 (talk) 01:29, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Prison Without Bars[edit]

Would you please fill out the refs? See wp:cite, template:cite web Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 05:19, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 13:17, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Please reconsider your interactions with other editors: this appears to be an ongoing problem, as you continue to rudely dismiss other editors after warnings. Acroterion (talk) 13:18, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Linkrot[edit]

Why have you added Linkrot tags to hundreds of articles? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:55, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

You misunderstand the use of the linkrot tag, and are tagging dozens of articles with no attempt at all to actually solve the problem. Multiple editors have asked you to stop and to at least discuss what you're doing. I appreciate that you've stopped making snarky comments along the way, but the simple addition of the tag without any follow-up is disruptive and contrary to the normal use of the tag. Acroterion (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Please stop to discuss your edits: if you do not, I will block this IP to ensure that you have an opportunity to clarify your reasons for the extensive drive-by tagging. Acroterion (talk) 01:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
And by this comment [1] it appears that you've not stopped with the snappy edit summaries. Acroterion (talk) 01:07, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Nina Dobrev. TRL (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Acroterion (talk) 01:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Go fuck yourself.
I am tagging broken articles, you stupid fuckwit.
99.238.74.216 (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2014 (UTC) Fuck you.

Let me say again:
Go fuck yourself you stupid fucking moron.
99.238.74.216 (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

{unblock|reason=Since when is tagging articles with a problem "disruptive"? Block the idiot who just blocked me.}}

Please use the time to familiarize yourself with ways to repair the references (thereby productively improving the encyclopedia) instead of simply applying drive-by tags against the normal use of the template. The articles aren't "broken" and every article with a bare url in the references doesn't need to be tagged: the template applies to articles that have extensive or exclusive use of bare urls. If you intend to follow up and repair the references, that would be a mitigating factor, but shotgunning tags irrespective of reference status and overall quality is disruptive. Please also take this time to reconsider your approach to other editors,, and to understand that this is a collaborative project. You were blocked because you either ignored or insulted everyone who has asked you what you were doing.Acroterion (talk) 01:13, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Bla bla bla.
That was the 3rd bloody time I tried to respond.

Insulted whom?
The guy who called me a vandal?
The guys who claim ownership?
The guys warring with me?
Have you blocked them yet?
99.238.74.216 (talk) 01:24, 20 June 2014 (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.

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


Request reason:

Insulted whom?

Decline reason:

Doesn't matter. Talk page access revoked. --jpgordon::==( o ) 01:29, 20 June 2014 (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 for as long as you are blocked.

June 2014[edit]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You just came off a block for adding the linkrot template to hundreds of articles without discussing. Please stop and get consensus for what you're doing. NeilN talk to me 22:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

June 2014[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Acroterion (talk) 22:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
"Leave my edits alone" [2] is not an appropriate response to another editor who has questioned your edits. Acroterion (talk) 22:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

You have already indicated previously that you know literally nothing about link rot or how it works.
Leave it to those of us who do.

As for the ownership-claiming guy who knows nothing about how Wikipedia works, have you blocked him for his edit warring?

I suggest you resign since you are not competent to hold this position and for the abuse of your discretionary authority.
Resign. 99.238.74.216 (talk) 22:42, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

The only ownership I see is from you, who have rudely directed another editor to "leave my edits alone." As for the addition of tags, you may want to read WP:SOFIXIT. Simply tag-bombing articles is of only marginal utility, but that's not the reason you were blocked: a persistent unwillingness to politely discuss your edits is the issue at hand. Acroterion (talk) 22:48, 22 June 2014 (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.

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


Request reason:

Please resign for the abuse of your authority 99.238.74.216 (talk) 22:43, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is not an unblock request. Please note that further use of this template for anything other than such will once again result in this page being locked. Kuru (talk) 00:14, 23 June 2014 (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 for as long as you are blocked.

July 2014[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Ebyabe talk - Inspector General ‖ 15:32, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to War Flowers may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • | country = United States]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:18, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014[edit]

Linkrot again Information icon Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. This user is adding incorrect template to article --palmiped |  Talk  09:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. Your behaviour is verging on harassment. Wikipedia prides itself on providing a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Palmiped, potentially compromise that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing. Dawnseeker2000 15:59, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Acroterion (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Once again, you've taken to attacks against those who dare to question your edits. You don't outrank anyone, and you have no business insulting people who question your actions. Acroterion (talk) 16:06, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
When your block expires, please consider fixing more of the bare references yourself. I have corrected some of them, using Reflinks, which makes this process easier. Should you spend more of your time here fixing problems you find instead of acting as though others should fix them for you, I believe you will find your editting experience here more effective and pleasurable. I hope you enjoy your break from Wikipedia. There is life outside of the computer. Goodness knows I seem to forget that sometimes. Anyway, best wishes. --Ebyabe talk - Border Town ‖ 18:57, 2 August 2014 (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.

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


Request reason:

What a load of crap. Why don't you block the incompetents who attacked my edits? I have not made any personal attacks other than to tell people what the rules are. Do you know what the rules around here are? Apparently not. If you did, YOU WOULD BE BACKING ME UP. While I'm at, why don't you look at the recent history of the article Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Somebody named Lotje has buggered it up but of course you won't do anything about that because you are too busy blocking me for no reason whatsoever. You guys never block the actual troublemakers; you only block the people unlucky enough to find the troublemakers. The administration of English Wikipedia is ONE BIG FUСKING JOKE. I know it. You know it. So unblock me and go after those people who are the real problem. It isn't me. That is perfectly bloody obvious. Why don't you go block Farmbrough again, eh. He probably made a mistake somewhere in his last 200,000 edits for which he wasn't paid a SINGLE RED FUСKING CENT. Go crucify him again. You people love making a sport out of tormenting the people around here who do the actual fuсking work. English Wikipedia is all about attacking the competent editors so the clowns can have their own private playground. You are lucky that the serious editors like me think that the importance of this project outweighs your incompetence and your bullshit. 99.238.74.216 (talk) 03:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm declining your request as your attitude is way too aggressive. Also, I'm revoking talk page access. PhilKnight (talk) 06:19, 3 August 2014 (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 for as long as you are blocked.