Jump to content

User talk:Atlan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 716779608 by Pablothepenguin (talk)
IP unblock request
Line 80: Line 80:


:Thank you {{Ping|QuackGuru}}. For the record, I have no intention of editing the essay in any way, but may leave the occasional comment on the talk page. {{Ping|Ricky81682}}, I think QuackGuru is quite capable of deciding for himself who is welcome on his talk pages. But your point is well taken.--[[User:Atlan|Atlan]] ([[User talk:Atlan|talk]]) 04:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
:Thank you {{Ping|QuackGuru}}. For the record, I have no intention of editing the essay in any way, but may leave the occasional comment on the talk page. {{Ping|Ricky81682}}, I think QuackGuru is quite capable of deciding for himself who is welcome on his talk pages. But your point is well taken.--[[User:Atlan|Atlan]] ([[User talk:Atlan|talk]]) 04:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

{{unblock|reason=I received the message: '''"The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia."''' I'm not actually blocked, but the 95.211.0.0/16 range from which I am apparently editing is blocked by {{Ping|Elockid}}. This is my work IP, and I do not work for a web host. I moved to a different work space in my office today, which I assume is on a different server. If this IP block is deemed necessary, can my account be IP block exempt? I expect to remain on this IP range for a while. As a test, I just made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_2758&diff=prev&oldid=728601699 this edit] on my other work space, which still works fine.--[[User:Atlan|Atlan]] ([[User talk:Atlan|talk]]) 11:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC)}}

Revision as of 11:55, 6 July 2016

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Reaganomics88 (talk) 13:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your uncivil behaviour

You accused me here[1] of making repeated requests for another editor to strike their edits. This was a complete misrepresentation on your part. I have now requested on the talk page for you to strike your comments. You have not done so yet. It seems a part of most dispute processes, including ANI, that I inform you on your talk page that we are in dispute. Please take this edit to indicate this and I urge you to strike through your offending edit. I also invite you to leave an apology at the talk page where you misrepresented my edit.DrChrissy (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have no intention of entertaining any of your petty demands.--Atlan (talk) 05:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Offer unblock request for Technophant

Technophant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Technophant has requested an unblock under the standard offer. As one of about 60 editors who has contributed to User talk:Technophant you may have an interest in this request. Sent by user:PBS via -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Gracias Reaganomics88 (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2015 (UTC) Reaganomics88 (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit?

Didn't bother to take a look at his previous diffs did you? Whilst my edit summary might have been misplaced, my warning was not. Go and check the edit history for the ANI page if you want to see who is really posting "BS" around here. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 22:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Skamecrazy123: Sorry for the choice of words. I DID see the edit history on ANI so I am aware of what you mean. But the edit you reverted was just him fixing his own post (changing "it" to "you"), so it made no sense to revert that and call it vandalism. Also, while problematic, none of his edits at ANI are vandalism, see WP:NOTVAND, so a "this is your only warning" for vandalism really wasn't appropriate. I wanted to leave you a note (pretty much what I'm saying here), but I forgot and went to bed. Sorry about that.--Atlan (talk) 05:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How are my edits problematic? Reaganomics88 (talk) 11:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oi

Smoke that good good Amsterdam weed much? The guild cannot be vanquished no matter how you try — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilsnupelives (talkcontribs) 14:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not nearly enough.--Atlan (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Atlan, I thank you for doing in above. Sorry, I couldn't because I wase blocked for 72 hours. So long and regards -- Sweepy (talk) 20:03, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed this edit, which seems to be contrary to our policy WP:CIVIL. Please be more careful next time, even if the discussion gets heated. You won't get more credibility with such behaviour anyways(and it can get you blocked, too).--Müdigkeit (talk) 20:12, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Cry me a river" means "You are overreacting". It cannot get me blocked, because it's not even remotely uncivil and any admin worth their salt would know that. That's why no one else in the 2 days since I made that comment but you has given me an unwarranted and uninformed warning about it. Find some better way to spend your time here.--Atlan (talk) 21:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


RFC

Actually, "by default" means just that, by default, (or "the way it usually runs unless someone closes it out before 30 days"), obviously IAR figures in to this as well. However, you are attempting to close this RFC way too early, it's not even a week old. Give it time KoshVorlon 18:46, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Atlan, I saw both of your messages, I said nothing when you asked if you should re-open it because I was waiting to see what happened on that page, if no one said anything else by Friday, I'd tell you to leave it closed, after all , you closed it in good faith, and for what you considered valid reasons, I certainly can't argue with that. KoshVorlon 19:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, glad to see you had the patience to wait it out.--Atlan (talk) 19:27, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Trial of Muhammad Yunus

An article that you have been involved in editing—Trial of Muhammad Yunus —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Worldbruce (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to ask you to stay away from User talk:QuackGuru/Reform of Wikipedia. It's a userspace draft now and QuackGuru has a right to be able to draft it on their own without sniping or commentary. It's been expressly rejected, been taken to MFD and has been moved into userspace. At this point, further commentary isn't necessary. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:22, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to return please focus on the reforms. This is very serious. You can return whenever you like. I don't want you to feel singled out. QuackGuru (talk) 20:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @QuackGuru:. For the record, I have no intention of editing the essay in any way, but may leave the occasional comment on the talk page. @Ricky81682:, I think QuackGuru is quite capable of deciding for himself who is welcome on his talk pages. But your point is well taken.--Atlan (talk) 04:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Atlan (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I received the message: "The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia." I'm not actually blocked, but the 95.211.0.0/16 range from which I am apparently editing is blocked by @Elockid:. This is my work IP, and I do not work for a web host. I moved to a different work space in my office today, which I assume is on a different server. If this IP block is deemed necessary, can my account be IP block exempt? I expect to remain on this IP range for a while. As a test, I just made this edit on my other work space, which still works fine.--Atlan (talk) 11:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I received the message: '''"The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia."''' I'm not actually blocked, but the 95.211.0.0/16 range from which I am apparently editing is blocked by <span class="template-ping">@[[User:Elockid|Elockid]]:</span>. This is my work IP, and I do not work for a web host. I moved to a different work space in my office today, which I assume is on a different server. If this IP block is deemed necessary, can my account be IP block exempt? I expect to remain on this IP range for a while. As a test, I just made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_2758&diff=prev&oldid=728601699 this edit] on my other work space, which still works fine.--[[User:Atlan|Atlan]] ([[User talk:Atlan|talk]]) 11:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I received the message: '''"The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia."''' I'm not actually blocked, but the 95.211.0.0/16 range from which I am apparently editing is blocked by <span class="template-ping">@[[User:Elockid|Elockid]]:</span>. This is my work IP, and I do not work for a web host. I moved to a different work space in my office today, which I assume is on a different server. If this IP block is deemed necessary, can my account be IP block exempt? I expect to remain on this IP range for a while. As a test, I just made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_2758&diff=prev&oldid=728601699 this edit] on my other work space, which still works fine.--[[User:Atlan|Atlan]] ([[User talk:Atlan|talk]]) 11:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I received the message: '''"The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia."''' I'm not actually blocked, but the 95.211.0.0/16 range from which I am apparently editing is blocked by <span class="template-ping">@[[User:Elockid|Elockid]]:</span>. This is my work IP, and I do not work for a web host. I moved to a different work space in my office today, which I assume is on a different server. If this IP block is deemed necessary, can my account be IP block exempt? I expect to remain on this IP range for a while. As a test, I just made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_2758&diff=prev&oldid=728601699 this edit] on my other work space, which still works fine.--[[User:Atlan|Atlan]] ([[User talk:Atlan|talk]]) 11:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}