User talk:94.246.154.130

Wipsenade (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

It was, but may not be now.82.27.25.5 (talk) 06:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Mona Sax do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia.  
Your edit here to Mona Sax was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://maxpayne.wikia.com/wiki/Mona_Sax) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to an external Wiki, then please note that these links should generally not be included (see 'links to avoid' #12).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 22:10, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Hello, 94.246.154.130. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Portrayal of females in video games

Please discuss your removal of April Ryan in the talk page, there was consensus to have her included. Diego Moya (talk) 22:21, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

You also removed the description of Custer's Revenge for no reason. Please be more careful when reverting content. Diego Moya (talk) 22:27, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Language

Don't Sware!86.24.9.104 (talk) 14:14, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Apology to 94.246.154.130

Dear User: 94.246.154.130, I was referring to the edits made in 2008 and the deleted couple from 2009, not the edits from July 2011, which was after I put my comments up. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. Wipsenade (talk) 14:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC) It was never proven, so User:Vidboy10 was not the same person.Wipsenade (talk) 16:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

---

____

Just stop

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Fleet Command (talk) 17:15, 5 July 2011 (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.

I thought you were too

They didn't even block you from what I said anyways. You just kept messing around and were really in bad faith. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 22:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

:-)82.27.25.5 (talk) 06:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

April 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Chechen people, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. List of notable people are standard on wp. The fact that a cat exists is not reason to delete a list. If you wish to add to the list, feel free. Epeefleche (talk) 11:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

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

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Chechen people, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. It is standard to have such lists of notable people, whether as stand-alone or embedded lists, and the existence of cats at the same time is not reason to delete such lists. See, e.g., List of Russian people and List of Polish people. And, as you see, the lists exist despite the existence of cats. Feel free to add to the list, as such lists by their nature are never complete, but do not delete appropriate entries from such lists or delete such lists in their entirety. Epeefleche (talk) 11:12, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

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

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 below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

The block will last for 24 hours and includes all persons using this IP address. Gross incivility is banned on Wikipedia.--File Éireann 11:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I have unblocked you to allow you to comment on Sockpuppet enquiry.--File Éireann 12:53, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jacobo Árbenz 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:

• political interests; thus, unlike other Latin American nations such as Haiti, Nicaragua and Cuba] the U.S. did not have to use overt military force to maintain dominance in Guatemala. The

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:18, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2014

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for evading a previous block. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:58, 15 September 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.

Ain't evading, yo. Just wasn't blocked. No, I don't want unblock. --94.246.154.130 (talk) 10:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Sup

This 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).

94.246.154.130 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Unjust bullshit. [1]

Decline reason:

IP address is not blocked directly. If you are still unable to edit, please sign in to your account and request an unblock, providing the message that appears when you try to edit. Yamla (talk) 13:03, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, 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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

k --94.246.154.130 (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

This 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).

94.246.154.130 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Again here, as some highly intelligent fellow blocked me for "Block evasion:" when I followed the instructions. Also, "This page is currently semi-protected so that only established registered users can edit it."

Decline reason:

You are indeed evading your indefinite block. I don't know what "instructions" you are talking about. I don't know any instructions that instruct blocked editor to evade the block. Vanjagenije (talk) 17:44, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, 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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Anyway, the message that appears when I try to edit:

"Editing from 94.246.154.130 has been blocked (disabled) by JamesBWatson for the following reason(s):

Block evasion:

This block has been set to expire: 14:24, 27 September 2021.

Even if blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page and email other editors and administrators." --94.246.154.130 (talk) 08:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Stating the case

I'm not logged-in because I don't even remember the password anymore, but used to be User:SNAAAAKE!! when I was indef blocked in September 2014. [2] Basically pretty much the same as stated with [3] (long, but a short version below) but with new developments.

So let's go with this. What happened is I'm a victim of a one-sided personal vendetta by User:PresN and others (inlcuding evident stalkers and obvious complete troll SPAs/IPs) and I believe I should be vindicated. A copy-paste of "the important part" from my self-canceled unblock from 2014 (note I've been angry):

The block says: "Long-term abuse and 15 prior blocks across three names". Note that 6 of these blocks in a row (all recent ones) were by PresN.[4] For as little as snide remarks such as "and welcome to Wikipedia". While selectively (and completely) ignoring everything that is directed at me. (Or at least I've never seen any evidence to contrary.) Now he bans me for being reacting angrily to a vandalism by a "wikihounding" stranger-stalker. The vandal's repeated (edit warring) "disruptive editing" on this article (which was 5 kb when I first came to it, and after over 200 edits of my it's now 40 kb) brought no reaction by Presn. Personal attacks too.

The fact's there's been a neverending abuse of me. See for example Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Ada Wong/1 which I just checked for the first time: "Agreed - this is a hallmark of Niemti/Snaake's awful writing: a parade of one liners and list positions which does not convey any kind of coherent themes (other than repeated sledgehammer references to sex), and is bloated and barely readable". (It was by the same troll who called me a "dickhead" and many people witnessed it and yet no one said anything.) And note how unwarranted this is: Ada Wong. And to cite: "Note: this reassessment request is the first (and thus far only) edit on Wikipedia by user Roflcopter gamer. - it's gotta be some hater's sock account (contribs). Another example: Talk:Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss "The "Release" section was added by the disruptive (and now blocked) editor User:Niemti back in November. ... I should add that Niemti's excessive inclusion of credits in the infobox goes against Wikipedia quality standards. ... Niemti is an infamous troublemaker." - for what? For adding things that SHOULD be in the article! (Contrary to the false claim, I actually did everything completely right. In fact, it was his removal of credits that is was vandalism.) Note that I COMPLETELY ignored the personal attack and baiting. I even ignored the vandalism, I was over it completely. It's not separate incidents. And this JimmyBlackwing person, I don't even know him (but he apparently knows so much about me, calling me "infamous troublemaker"). Where is it all coming from. That got to be some source, someone spreading these memes around, talking shit about me. And that "I've had multiple editors contact me over the past year asking if I could block/ban you". I'd like to see who. I wonder if I don't even know them too.

Take a look at my edits, how little I spend arguing with anyone on anything: last 500 edits. In fact recently I had much more edits UPLOADING IMAGES (replacing old white-background infobox images with opaque pngs - scores of them) then even discussing ANYTHING WITH ANYONE. But apparently just saying Actually it's all very easy answers", "how could anyone even have any objections", and "This is all so obvious", (I don't know "how could anyone even have any objections" with it too) is now being "incivil and argumentative" (it wasn't at all) so much one gets banned [it was then changed to blocked indifinitely].

Adding further insult (literally) to an injury (injustice), I just found out the very same evidently biased and obsessed admin who banned me (PresN) recently went on to delete several of my (well-sourced) articles while insulting me with personal attacks, in which he was joined in by his network of associates some of whom were openly summoned by name (it was obviously my mistake that I dind't develop relations, despite over a decade of editing and hundreds of thousands and possibly over million edits). Here are some examples of this that I discovered by accident, where I was being attacked personally and by (old) name, with the articles like [5] and at least 6 more being targeted specifically as my creations, which was presented an actual argument for their deletion in an informal discussion outside of normal AfD system and with onsite canvassing: [6][7]. There are probably more, but I don't know how to find more because googling brings nothing (not even these).

This is not anything isolated or new, as this group abuse has been going for years, which I've been just not collecting, but that included actually being called names (without any repercussions, but also I nevered sought these besides one case of an early obssessive stalking (it might have been User:Bridies or someone of a similar name, I'm not sure because I don't remember). They're constantly attacking me in all sorts of ways. I wish I could present more evidence, but I've been not saving it, and now as I said I don't know how to find it. But there was lots of it, and it still continues even as after PresN evicted me. Actually finding out about it motivated me to write this.

And even with my block, PresN banned-then-blocked me for saying "fucking" in my angered response to massive vandalism (deletion of over 12 kb of sourced content) by the person (namely: User:Dave Dial) who's curiously never edited neither this article or any even remotely related articles before (and so was evidently was following my edits despite no obvious beef like in the case of PresN, possibly a set-up given the cicrumstances and chains of events) and who himself said "fuck" (in the acronym "wtf") [8] - and that person wan't even commented on either their vandalism or swearing, much less sanctioned. And for me saying "dick" in anger (dealing with repeated vandalism) was also used as an excuse, while me being called a "dickhead" in a conversation presence of admins didn't being any consequences for the person who did this to me (as noted above), of course.

And so I've spent (and wasted, really) much of my life dedicated this project, and all I've got in return was only so much disrespect, stalking/griefing (including by anon IPs and SPAs like with this "Roflcopter_gamer" as seen above, but for example here someone impersonating-mocking me: [9] - and then being blocked as me and not as an obvious troll, which wasn't even corrected after I pointed it out to PresN and also adds evidence of his bad faith), and outright abuse (condoned). This is complete double standards, and the only real difference is are people in the clique(s) or not.

As for me, despite being here since 2004 I don't even know anyone high-positioned on Wikipedia for a protection as it is enjoyed by some (you know it's true), and know very few people in general (I think I might count on hands these I remember names of right now), but I suppose the strangers who gave my these otherwise worthless barnstars might at least speak about the reality of me and my work if asked? Anyone neutral can also check my edits and I also naturally may take any questions if needed. Here I just hope it's going to be impartial and not a clique action again. Maybe I'm naive. After all this is what Wikipedia is like these days: [10] --94.246.154.130 (talk) 09:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@Salvidrim!: hey. [11] --94.246.154.130 (talk) 09:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Since you pinged me, I guess you wanted me to see this? I'm not stepping in this mess again; I'll just leave the pertinent links and let any admin who wants to respond to this check them out themselves. I'll just say that there's a reason that you don't have anyone "high-positioned" willing to defend/protect you, but do have numerous editors who remember you less than fondly. --PresN 16:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

• Block log for HanzoHattori, who came back as Niemti after getting a reprieve from their indef-block
• Block log for SNAAAAKE!! (formerly Niemti)
• Block log for this IP address, used across all of the above names on occasion
• Block log for AggressiveNavel, a sock that Niemti used after getting indef-blocked (again)
• Block log for LKAvn, the other sock that Niemti used after getting indef-blocked (again)
• Block log for 302ET, the sock Niemti used after those two were blocked, and the one that got posted on by "GhostofNiemti", who was either Niemti or a troll, and was blocked either way

There's no "either" and it's insulting to write it this way since it was made specifically to mock me. (Not an isolated incident.) And as I said no, I don't care about the cliques. Anyone can see my edits, which altogether probably exceeded 1 million since 2004. To call this "disruptive", like JamesBWatson did, after how much I helped to build website, is also insulting. --94.246.154.130 (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

For Beemer69

Btw, speaking of (something of) friends, I'd like to ping you @Beemer69: (I've never even pinged anyone before, and I just learned how from Presn (edit: or was it rather Czar, these people all confuse me) doing this to organize an attack on my articles as seen in that link above). So, hi. If you're interested, I could give you hundreds of possible sources from the magazine scans I've been collecting so you might to pick up from me (which you you pretty much already do). I might also share all these magazines with you (right now I've got nearly 20,000 isssues, of over 500 publications) via a torrent or something, if you want. It's almost all searchable PDFs in reasonable sizes. --94.246.154.130 (talk) 09:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)