Jump to content

User talk:99.150.255.75

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 99.150.255.75 (talk) at 15:28, 15 May 2011 (* I finally am able to put the unblock request without the Sultan's link.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Yep -adding the statement at the top messes up the page.

Note

Please log in when posting in relation to disputes. Thank you. Risker (talk) 05:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I wanted to reply on your talk page but could not. I was hoping I could add factual information only and get input from others - I did not and do not intend to get involved. (Where "involved" means adding my opinion and suggestions and other nonsense although it is certainly reasonable to have a definition of "involved" that includes my actions :) ) I accidentally made my first comment when logged out and it was then too late to uncomment without my IP information being linked to my comment. But - I certainly do see your point and agree with it and will try to not involve myself further 99.150.255.75 (talk) 06:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone really read my talk page? 99.150.255.75 (talk) 06:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure - I do! 99.150.255.75 (talk) 06:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone besides myself? 99.150.255.75 (talk) 06:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Given that I created it to leave the initial message, probably not. You can blame a certain very unwelcome vandal for the semi-protection of my talk page; every time it expires I am inundated with messages that range from the rude to the obscene, and the RC patrollers get very frustrated with me. Nonetheless, I will keep your page on my watchlist. Thanks for your understanding; I was hoping that your edits started as accidentally logged out, and can understand not wanting to make an obvious linkage. You might want to be aware that, should that happen again, if you ping an oversighter or post to oversight-L, we're usually pretty quick at responding; however, if you accidentally log out on a high traffic page like ANI, the best solution is to revert yourself, because it's unlikely we will be able to fix things without messing up subsequent edits. Best, Risker (talk) 06:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"I was hoping that your edits started as accidentally logged out, and can understand not wanting to make an obvious linkage." -- That's my story and I'm sticking to it :) Goodnight 99.150.255.75 (talk) 06:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dang it

Edited non-logged in again - sorry all who are dismayed by IP addresses. I need a counter on my sig that shows number of unlogged in edits I have made. Great, now I'll be blocked as a single purpose account - although I'd love to learn what my purpose is 99.150.255.75 (talk) 03:05, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as long as I'm logged out

I have just noticed that a contribution I made last time I was logged out was described as:

"A single-purpose IP started contributing to an ANI discussion about a revert war on the Wikivoices main page. It was not about our Wikivoices interview at all, but the IP spammed all of our talk pages apparently to confuse that discussion. Once I figured out that the ANI discussion was not in fact related to that event, I reverted the talkpage spam so that you wouldn't all waste the same effort."

Who made that rude comment? It was [user:sj] "Greetings. I am sj, or Samuel Klein. I am currently an elected member of the Wikimedia Board of Trustees (related ideas)." [1]

Poor manners.

What was it in response to?

A discussion such as this: [2]

Hello, There is a dispute [3] about the publication of WikiVoices #45 of which you were a particapant. Do you have any comments to add about how this matter has been handled? 99.150.255.75 (talk) 04:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Seems clear, concise, polite, nonconfrontational - certainly not an attempt to confuse a discussion.

Other comments I made were: [3]

Hello, I commented at ANI where you had helpfully started a discussion to gather input. Unfortunately (for me) - my comments were wrapped up in one of those collapse_top/collapse_bottom boxes. It looks like ANI is not the place for the dispute to be handled.

Can you suggest anyone who could calmly handle the manner to coax the participants into talking nicely to each other?

Thanks! 99.150.255.75 (talk) 05:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

and [4]

I understand that you do not want the names of the participants shown as you believe that the dispute today is unrelated to the original round table recording and all the participants in it. But - why do you keep removing my comment (which does not include any names) describing the origination of the dispute in my reply to Will Beback? I thought that Will and others would like more background. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=316438198&oldid=316438044 Can you please take my comment out of the collapsed section and put it back into the regular section. Also - can you suggest anyone to calmly, logically, kindly work with the participants in the dispute?


I certainly don't see any reason to assume a single purpose IP was intending to confuse anyone.

The only confusion was when Sam deleted the posts and then two confused users asked: [5] " Why do you revert my discussion page?" and [6]"May I please inquire as to your rationale for having reverted a recent edit to my Talk page, in an apparent attempt to prevent people (me?) from seeing the message another user had posted there? I would prefer to hear your explanation for such a seemingly odd action on your part, before I came to my conclusions about it. Thank you. "

I'll certainly not vote for Sam Klein again. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 03:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting tale - has Mr. Klein made any comments in reference to these full details? I'm half-tempted to log out for a few days just to see how different it is . . . we could write a book called Anonymous IP.--otherlleft 17:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bigfoot

All logs may be viewed via Special:Logs. In the case of the protection log for the Bigfoot article, you want this. Please let me know if you have any other questions or issues. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Bigfoot, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. --McGeddon (talk) 17:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're making minor edits, such as wikifying individual words, it's preferable to try to make them all in a single edit, rather than one after the other in separate edits. It keeps the page history more readable, and has less chance of clashing with another editor who's editing at the same time (who'll have to fight through "another editor changed the article while you were typing" edit conflict warnings for a while; every time they fix their edit to include your change, you'll be adding another change).
If you find yourself noticing just one more thing every time you click "Save page" (which happens to all of us), it's probably worth clicking "Show preview" for a while instead, to see what else you spot. --McGeddon (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Edit Today?

I cannot edit today.

I can edit tomorrow I cannot edit the sabdbox today I can edit the sadbbox tomorrow

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I don't think that I have triggered the edit filter since the first time that I triggered it. I was blocked for one day and immediately apologized after the block expired and I was able to edit again. [7]. I have not triggered it again. The only edits that I have made after my original block were to apologize for my previous trigger of the edit filter, a revert of an unexplained deletion on my talk page, and constructive edits to the article which are still present. Thanks! I think that edit filter is broken - I could not actually make my unblock request - Please check my edit history - the article that I have edited is not allowed to be noted on my talk page because it contains disallowed characters - I think that the edit filter is broken for I.P. editors and that page about the Ottoman Sultan that the edit filter blocks the name of for I.P. editors. I am no kidding or trying to weasel out or being pointy. Thanks,!

If I put the link AXXXbdülaziz on my talk page it triggers the edit filter --if you remove the XXX characters--. The filter is broken - it should not disallow a link to a Wikipedia article.

Sequence of events:

  • I purposely trigger the edit filter. I was curious
  • I am blocked for a day
  • I edit my talk page
  • My talk page is reverted
  • My block expires
  • I apologize for triggering the edit filter
  • I ask why my talk page was reverted
  • After a day of no response I re-edit my talk page
  • I edit the article on the Sultan that I cannot mention here because the name triggers the edit filter - but it is in my edit history
  • Today I see that I am blocked for a week for triggering the edit filter
  • I attempt to use the "unblock" template but it somehow triggers the edit filter when it contains the name of the Sultan.
  • I try again with the same result
  • I finally am able to put the unblock request without the Sultan's link.
99.150.255.75 (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2011 (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 don't think that I have triggered the edit filter since the first time that I triggered it. I was blocked for one day and immediately apologized after the block expired and I was able to edit again. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timotheus_Canens&diff=428937100&oldid=428883362]. I have not triggered it again. The only edits that I have made after my original block were to apologize for my previous trigger of the edit filter, a revert of an unexplained deletion on my talk page, and constructive edits to the article which are still present. Thanks! I think that edit filter is broken - I could not actually make my unblock request - Please check my edit history - the article that I have edited is not allowed to be noted on my talk page because it contains disallowed characters - I think that the edit filter is broken for I.P. editors and that page about the Ottoman Sultan that the edit filter blocks the name of for I.P. editors. I am no kidding or trying to weasel out or being pointy. Thanks,! If I put the link [[AXXXbdülaziz]] on my talk page it triggers the edit filter --if you remove the XXX characters--. The filter is broken - it should not disallow a link to a Wikipedia article. <P></P> Sequence of events: * I purposely trigger the edit filter. I was curious * I am blocked for a day * I edit my talk page * My talk page is reverted * My block expires * I apologize for triggering the edit filter * I ask why my talk page was reverted * After a day of no response I re-edit my talk page * I edit the article on the Sultan that I cannot mention here because the name triggers the edit filter - but it is in my edit history * Today I see that I am blocked for a week for triggering the edit filter * I attempt to use the "unblock" template but it somehow triggers the edit filter when it contains the name of the Sultan. * I try again with the same result * I finally am able to put the unblock request without the Sultan's link. [[Special:Contributions/99.150.255.75|99.150.255.75]] ([[User talk:99.150.255.75#top|talk]]) 15:14, 15 May 2011 (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 don't think that I have triggered the edit filter since the first time that I triggered it. I was blocked for one day and immediately apologized after the block expired and I was able to edit again. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timotheus_Canens&diff=428937100&oldid=428883362]. I have not triggered it again. The only edits that I have made after my original block were to apologize for my previous trigger of the edit filter, a revert of an unexplained deletion on my talk page, and constructive edits to the article which are still present. Thanks! I think that edit filter is broken - I could not actually make my unblock request - Please check my edit history - the article that I have edited is not allowed to be noted on my talk page because it contains disallowed characters - I think that the edit filter is broken for I.P. editors and that page about the Ottoman Sultan that the edit filter blocks the name of for I.P. editors. I am no kidding or trying to weasel out or being pointy. Thanks,! If I put the link [[AXXXbdülaziz]] on my talk page it triggers the edit filter --if you remove the XXX characters--. The filter is broken - it should not disallow a link to a Wikipedia article. <P></P> Sequence of events: * I purposely trigger the edit filter. I was curious * I am blocked for a day * I edit my talk page * My talk page is reverted * My block expires * I apologize for triggering the edit filter * I ask why my talk page was reverted * After a day of no response I re-edit my talk page * I edit the article on the Sultan that I cannot mention here because the name triggers the edit filter - but it is in my edit history * Today I see that I am blocked for a week for triggering the edit filter * I attempt to use the "unblock" template but it somehow triggers the edit filter when it contains the name of the Sultan. * I try again with the same result * I finally am able to put the unblock request without the Sultan's link. [[Special:Contributions/99.150.255.75|99.150.255.75]] ([[User talk:99.150.255.75#top|talk]]) 15:14, 15 May 2011 (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 don't think that I have triggered the edit filter since the first time that I triggered it. I was blocked for one day and immediately apologized after the block expired and I was able to edit again. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timotheus_Canens&diff=428937100&oldid=428883362]. I have not triggered it again. The only edits that I have made after my original block were to apologize for my previous trigger of the edit filter, a revert of an unexplained deletion on my talk page, and constructive edits to the article which are still present. Thanks! I think that edit filter is broken - I could not actually make my unblock request - Please check my edit history - the article that I have edited is not allowed to be noted on my talk page because it contains disallowed characters - I think that the edit filter is broken for I.P. editors and that page about the Ottoman Sultan that the edit filter blocks the name of for I.P. editors. I am no kidding or trying to weasel out or being pointy. Thanks,! If I put the link [[AXXXbdülaziz]] on my talk page it triggers the edit filter --if you remove the XXX characters--. The filter is broken - it should not disallow a link to a Wikipedia article. <P></P> Sequence of events: * I purposely trigger the edit filter. I was curious * I am blocked for a day * I edit my talk page * My talk page is reverted * My block expires * I apologize for triggering the edit filter * I ask why my talk page was reverted * After a day of no response I re-edit my talk page * I edit the article on the Sultan that I cannot mention here because the name triggers the edit filter - but it is in my edit history * Today I see that I am blocked for a week for triggering the edit filter * I attempt to use the "unblock" template but it somehow triggers the edit filter when it contains the name of the Sultan. * I try again with the same result * I finally am able to put the unblock request without the Sultan's link. [[Special:Contributions/99.150.255.75|99.150.255.75]] ([[User talk:99.150.255.75#top|talk]]) 15:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:99.150.255.75&oldid=429245470"