User talk:104.218.36.228

January 2020

1. If you'd fix your pages by yourself instead of whining about everybody else having to do your work for you, there wouldn't be a problem. 2. Wikipedia as a whole has been relegated to the realm of `infotainment' for years now ever since all the serious academic institutions banned it from being used in research. 3. Good luck trying a ban. This is a dynamic IP address. All I have to do is cycle the modem and get a new one. You can't block a whole company's IP addresses otherwise nobody would be left for you to bother. And if you did, you wonder why everybody just changes internet service providers or goes through VPNs or whatever. Like I said - either fix your pages yourself or go bother somebody else kid. Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Michael Blake (author) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 03:37, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:104.218.36.228. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Carl Tristan Orense 03:39, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Michael Blake (author), you may be blocked from editing. CLCStudent (talk) 03:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

As I mentioned at AN, this seems to be a fairly silly dispute. There is no need for any maintenance or fixing at Michael Blake (author) in relation to the issue you were involved in. We've already marked the status of the URL as dead in the code for the template [1], which means the archive version will be the primary URL shown. That is the way we handled dead links where an archive version is available, there is no further need to mark the link as dead. Your second change introduced an error into the template. And with both your first and second changes, since you removed the dead URL status, if we ever decide to change how we handle dead links, or links where the URL status isn't specified, your change would have caused further harm. If you feel dead links need to show more information, you should make a proposal on the relevant template page so that the existing URL status is used rather than simply introducing additional text. Nil Einne (talk) 14:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

May 2020

Please refrain from making changes to plot summaries/synopses that conflict with the plot summary edit guides, as you did at Backdraft (film). You may wish to review the specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. Excessive detail and high word counts should be avoided. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 17:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

June 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Argentine peso, 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. ZLEA _T\^C 13:10, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

February 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to U.S. national anthem protests, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

March 2021

BZZZTTTTT! Wrong answer. Issue escalated to supervisor/admin. Thanks for playing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.36.228 (talk • contribs) March 19, 2021 08:36:51 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Saadrafiq4. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Bear Magazine have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. — Saadrafiq4 (talk) 08:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

IP, as I mentioned at AN, again your complaint is silly. Your addition [2], other than lacking sources, is also simply not useful. Who is this man who died of AIDS, and how was he an early inspiration? You need to provide sources and offer some explanation as to how he was an early inspiration, and maybe a name. If this man is David Grant, we already explain his role in the sentence after the next sentence where you tried to make your addition so your addition is even more unhelpful. If the person isn't David Grant, then the Grant example shows how the info can be meaningfully integrated into the text. (Although it also seems to lack sources, please don't take that part as an example.) Nil Einne (talk) 14:58, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Nil Einne said: (Although it also seems to lack sources, please don't take that part as an example.)

If you are an administrator: My point exactly. People leave one violation by one person alone and gang up on the exact same violation by the next person without fixing all the ones that went before and all the people who went before.

It's exactly why like I said A) Wikipedia has been relegated to the basement-level of infotainment for years B) Everybody who would have been contributors either gets driven away or leaves before it can happen.

The rest of us cycle our modems/routers and get a new one once the bullying crosses acertain threshold - or we get VPNs or whatever.

If you are not an administrator, your googling of the web, keywording of a knowledgebase, recitations of FAQs, explanations of company policy or referrals out to someplace with only the same 3 abilities is only contributing to the problem.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.36.228 (talk • contribs) March 21, 2021 06:44:27 (UTC)

April 2021

Then it will be put back. And if it gets removed again, it will get put back again.

If it happens a third time, your interference will be reported under the Three Revert Rule.

If a page is protected as a result, people like us will go on to the next one.

When all of Wikipedia is protected from casual non-member editing, it will just prove what the news says every other day:

1 Wikipedia has been relegated to the lowest realm of infotainment imaginable as no serious research institution permits it to be used as a resource.

2 Wikipedia has long been known to be a very small clique of mostly men mostly between the ages of 25 and 40 and mostly with the same intolerance for the same things.

3 As previously stated, unless you are an administrator in charge, you need to go bother somebody else or risk contributing to the demise of Wikipedia.

Thanks for playing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.36.228 (talk • contribs) 06:00 April 15,2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Ixfd64. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Bret Harte. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 02:02, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Nope. See above under ``If it gets deleted, it will be put back. If it gets deleted a second time, it will be put back again. If it gets deleted a third time it trips the Three Revert Rule. Then once every page is protected against casual edits by unregistered users and Wikipedia loses its' intended purpose and gets permanently relegated to the realm of infotainment and nobody else pays any attention to it other than the small clique of guys that every national news story complains keeps Wikipedia to itself and drives everybody else off like the have been - maybe they'll get their long-overdue comeuppance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.36.228 (talk • contribs) 12:47, April 25, 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Bret Harte, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. EpicPupper 02:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Copyright violations

I have removed text that you copied wholesale from this copyrighted source: https://www.masterworksbroadway.com/music/what-makes-sammy-run-original-cast-album-1964/. We welcome constructive edits, but in the future, please do not copy verbatim from copyrighted sources - you have to write in your own words. W. Tell DCCXLVI ^{t | c} 10:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Please do not add or change content, as you did at (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction, 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. Tkbrett (✉) 12:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

February 2022

See text under ``In the same source....

When you add information to Wikipedia, you must cite a WP:Reliable source that verifies all of the information that you add, and the information must be noteworthy and a balanced addition. See WP:V. -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

February 2022

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Northern pikeminnow, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

December 2022

Hello, I'm EchidnaLives. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Charley Pride, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. echidnaLives - talk - edits 01:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Charley Pride. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. echidnaLives - talk - edits 01:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

New message from EchidnaLives

Hello, 104.218.36.228. You have new messages at EchidnaLives's talk page.
Message added 12:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

echidnaLives - talk - edits 12:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

No. Just no

I am not harrassing you. I have not violated 3RR. The 3 revert rule is for more than 3 reverts. WP:CIR. echidnaLives - talk - edits 12:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

So you are forcing me to do it. Same difference.

Hardhead who needs stomped on. If not by me, we'll leave that for ARBCOM to decide.

You want to keep pestering the lion, don't be surprised when you get bit. 104.218.36.228 (talk) 12:35, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

There is absolutely no way arbcom will be in any way interested in this. If you withdraw your request at the noticeboard, then this can be forgotten, and everyone can move on. If you keep insisting that the "Hardhead needs to be stomped on", this will not end in your favour... echidnaLives - talk - edits 12:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Only warning

Your report to ANI highlights a continuing and consistent problematic behavior on your part going back years. If you continue to violate Wikipedia policy, every now and then denouncing those who deal with that and wasting everybody's time, I would block you for a long time. Acroterion (talk) 13:10, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You don't threaten me, kid. Escalating past this administrator to a higher administrator. 104.218.36.228 (talk) 13:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please don't threaten me with a good time. There is no "higher administrator." You posted at an administrator's noticeboard, you should not be surprised to get a response from an administrator (of fifteen years' standing). Whether it's to your liking is not my concern. Acroterion (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Everybody has a supervisor unless they're the owner or director of legal affairs of the product or service.

Since you are neither of the above, sooner or later I W I L L find somebody to report you to.

Thanks for playing. 104.218.36.228 (talk) 05:16, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours 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 ~~~~}}.  RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:44, 22 December 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.

OK, this is enough. You're clearly WP:NOTHERE. After the block is lifted, I would HIGHLY suggest you stop with the disruption. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:45, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Not disrupting anything. I improved an article and got stomped on for it.

Now I am stomping back and reporting the stompers to the people above them until the stompers get dealt with by whoever they report to.

You wanna join the ranks of people I find out who they report to and do so? Fine.

And like everybody knows, blocks of whatever length are immaterial.

People just do the same as the e.g. videogamers do - cycle their routers to get a new IP address, change internet companies or use a VPN. 104.218.36.228 (talk) 14:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

No, you're just being hostile to everybody you encounter, and we've had enough of that. Administrators are accountable to the Wikipedia community and nobody else. We're empowered on behalf of the community to summarily deal with editors who are using the encyclopedia project to antagonize other editors, as you've consistently done for a long time now. You're not the first disruptive editor who's threatened to find other means of wasting their time and ours. Acroterion (talk) 14:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm surprised, to be blunt, that you haven't been blocked for this in the past. And seeing as you are admitting you will find ways to circumvent the block, thanks. Talk page access removed for the remainder of the block. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

July 2023

Hi. Please do not add uncited material to articles, as you did with the numerous uncited paragraphs you added to the Cassette tape article with these edits, as this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. While you did add some material that was acconmpanied by citations, the uncited material you added could not remain, because, as you've been warned numerous times on this talk page, Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 16:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)