Interested in becoming a regular contributor to Wikipedia? Create an account!
Your IP address, 113.197.13.138, is registered to AARNet and may be shared by multiple users of an educational institution, so you might receive messages on this page that were not intended for you.
If you are unable to create an account due to your institution's IP address being blocked, follow these instructions. If you are autoblocked repeatedly, contact your network administrator or instructor and request that your school contact Wikimedia'sXFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on its proxy servers so that blocks will affect only the intended user.
Administrators: review contributions carefully if blocking this IP address or reverting its contributions. If a block is needed, consider a soft block using {{School block}}.
In response to vandalism from this IP address, abuse reports may be sent to its network administrator for investigation. Educational institution staff and network administrators wishing to monitor this IP address for vandalism can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
This IP address has been repeatedly blocked from editing Wikipedia in response to abuse of editing privileges. Further abuse from this IP address may result in an extended block.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. 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 many editors recommend that you create 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 (113.197.13.138) 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.
I see you're new to Wikipedia. Thanks for being WP:BOLD When editors revert your work, you need to discuss them and achieve consensus. See WP:BRD. You can't just keep reverting. See WP:3RR.Please raise this on the article's talk page before proceeding further. --Merbabu (talk) 06:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"No" you won't take it to talk page? I would cut the reverting out. Take it to the talk page to discuss. You've now got four separate editors disagreeing with you. Wikipedia needs and welcomes good new editors. But it will also block people who can't work within it's policies and guidelines. --Merbabu (talk) 09:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Davidelit (Talk)07:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Merbabu. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Manus Province that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. "Use your brains" is not per our WP:CIVIL policyMerbabu (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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 ~~~~}}.
That's because five separate people each rolled back your edit. You kept going. They suggested you raise it on the talk page as is the Wikipedia way. Read: WP:3RR and WP:BRD. There's other things to learn, but that's enough for now. Also, there are instructions on how to appeal the block. But it's only 31 hours. If continue the same way when you're unblocked, the next block will be longer, and so on, until it's permanent. As we said, use the article talk pages. For example Talk:Sumatra. --Merbabu (talk) 07:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Did you mean edit on Manus Province? Because you put content about detention center on economy section, so you need to provide clear connection between detention center and economy with proper source. Information about the detention center itself is already mentioned on lead/intro section. Ckfasdf (talk) 07:41, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history at List of tallest buildings in Abu Dhabi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Austronesier (talk) 09:17, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop your disruptive editing on the Conversion to Judaism page. If you feel so strongly about the change you wish to make, raise it on the talk page. You can't try to force things on Wikipedia; that's not how things work. Île flottante (talk) 13:25, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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 ~~~~}}.
Well, it is correct that now we don't want to listen to you anymore, after giving you more than ample hearing on a number of pages. People have been patient and helpful, but there are limits. Also, have you not noticed that you are alone against least 1/2 dozen editors? I'm guessing more editors if we did a thorough tally. As was noted in Talk:Java, it is you who haven't listened (read). It is now disruptive to wikipedia and good editors' time. That is why you are blocked. --Merbabu (talk) 07:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, your access to your talk page (ie, this page) is not yet blocked. You can appeal your block - see the instructions above. However, note that you can also be blocked from this page if it gets disruptive. --Merbabu (talk) 07:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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).
Hello there. I want Ed to remove the block. I'd like to continue editing, I've got some sources too. Wikipedia is a good place. Thank you. 113.197.13.138 (talk) 07:36, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
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.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Your recent editing history at Sydney Airport shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Andrewgprout (talk) 08:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.
Educational institution staff and network administrators wishing to monitor this IP address for vandalism can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
Hello, I'm Merbabu. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Manus Province that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. "Use your brains" is not per our WP:CIVIL policy Merbabu (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:113.197.13.138 reported by User:Austronesier (Result: ). Thank you. Austronesier (talk) 08:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at South Australian State Emergency Service, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 14:26, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Murder of Hannah Clarke, you may be blocked from editing. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
