User talk:86.122.28.167

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, at 86.122.28.167, has made edits that do not conform to our policies and guidelines and therefore have been reverted. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you did not do this, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:

• Help contents – the main help page.
• Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask the Help Desk, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! Andre🚐 15:47, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

Well, the reason I made the edit to the talk page is i thought I had a good point. I find it amazing that Wikipedia editors are usually such trashy people that they don't take neutrality standards seriously. I read the article on "White genocide" and I remained unconvinced that it is "a conspiracy theory". The sources that may support the white genocide claim, such as the 2020 Census, are not referenced, while the sources that may disprove it are unreliable. So, I commented on the talk page. Then, one of these trashy editors insulted me and completely, and reverted my changes. Then I reverted them back, and then they were reverted again, and so on. I think I made a good point. And I would love to know more about white genocide. But the article isn't good. It neither proves it disprove it. I know you won't unban me in a million years. The purpose of Wikipedia isn't the sharing information, it's propaganda. 86.122.28.167 (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

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=Well, the reason I made the edit to the talk page is i thought I had a good point. I find it amazing that Wikipedia editors are usually such trashy people that they don't take neutrality standards seriously. I read the article on "White genocide" and I remained unconvinced that it is "a conspiracy theory". The sources that may support the white genocide claim, such as the 2020 Census, are not referenced, while the sources that may disprove it are unreliable. So, I commented on the talk page. Then, one of these trashy editors insulted me and completely, and reverted my changes. Then I reverted them back, and then they were reverted again, and so on. I think I made a good point. And I would love to know more about white genocide. But the article isn't good. It neither proves it disprove it. I know you won't unban me in a million years. The purpose of Wikipedia isn't the sharing information, it's propaganda. [[Special:Contributions/86.122.28.167|86.122.28.167]] ([[User talk:86.122.28.167#top|talk]]) 16:44, 21 August 2022 (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=Well, the reason I made the edit to the talk page is i thought I had a good point. I find it amazing that Wikipedia editors are usually such trashy people that they don't take neutrality standards seriously. I read the article on "White genocide" and I remained unconvinced that it is "a conspiracy theory". The sources that may support the white genocide claim, such as the 2020 Census, are not referenced, while the sources that may disprove it are unreliable. So, I commented on the talk page. Then, one of these trashy editors insulted me and completely, and reverted my changes. Then I reverted them back, and then they were reverted again, and so on. I think I made a good point. And I would love to know more about white genocide. But the article isn't good. It neither proves it disprove it. I know you won't unban me in a million years. The purpose of Wikipedia isn't the sharing information, it's propaganda. [[Special:Contributions/86.122.28.167|86.122.28.167]] ([[User talk:86.122.28.167#top|talk]]) 16:44, 21 August 2022 (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=Well, the reason I made the edit to the talk page is i thought I had a good point. I find it amazing that Wikipedia editors are usually such trashy people that they don't take neutrality standards seriously. I read the article on "White genocide" and I remained unconvinced that it is "a conspiracy theory". The sources that may support the white genocide claim, such as the 2020 Census, are not referenced, while the sources that may disprove it are unreliable. So, I commented on the talk page. Then, one of these trashy editors insulted me and completely, and reverted my changes. Then I reverted them back, and then they were reverted again, and so on. I think I made a good point. And I would love to know more about white genocide. But the article isn't good. It neither proves it disprove it. I know you won't unban me in a million years. The purpose of Wikipedia isn't the sharing information, it's propaganda. [[Special:Contributions/86.122.28.167|86.122.28.167]] ([[User talk:86.122.28.167#top|talk]]) 16:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

August 2022

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  EvergreenFir (talk) 16:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

---