User talk:207.81.109.60: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:43, 27 February 2008

Attention:

This IP address, 207.81.109.60, is registered to TELUS Communications (Canada). In the event of persistent vandalism from this address, efforts may be made to contact them to report abuse. Contact information may be available in the WHOIS report.

If you are editing from this IP address and are frustrated by irrelevant messages, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself. Sometimes, in response to vandalism, you may be temporarily unable to create an account.

If you are an unregistered user operating from this address, note that it may be possible for the owner of the IP to determine who was making contributions from this address at any given time.

If you are the owner of this address responding to reports of inappropriate conduct from this address, you may find the contributions history and block log for this address helpful. Please feel free to contact any administrator who has blocked this address with questions (blocking admins will be listed in the block log).

February 2008

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Vancouver. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 21:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Vancouver, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Vancouver. 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. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 22:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Vancouver, you will be blocked from editing. freshacconcispeaktome 23:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

-- Ed (Edgar181) 00:24, 27 February 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

I did nothing wrong

Decline reason:

You could have provided sources for your more up-to-date information (as the purportedly out-of-date information had, or discussed it on the talk page. Edit warring is disruptive. Sit out the block and think about what you did. — Daniel Case (talk) 01:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I merely corrected inaccurate or out of date information.

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 <div class="user-block"> [[Image:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left]] {{#if:|You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing for a period of '''time'''|You have been temporarily '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing}} in accordance with [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|Wikipedia's blocking policy]] for {{#if:|'''reason'''|[[Wikipedia:Vandalism|abuse of editing privileges]]}}. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|make constructive contributions]].  If you believe this block is unjustified, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|contest the block]] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{#if:|-- [[User:Edgar181|Ed]] ([[User talk:Edgar181|Edgar181]]) 00:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-block1 --> -- [[User:Edgar181|Ed]] ([[User talk:Edgar181|Edgar181]]) 00:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
+{{unblock reviewed|1=I did nothing wrong|decline=You could have provided sources for your more up-to-date information (as the purportedly out-of-date information had, or discussed it on the talk page. [[WP:EW|Edit warring]] is disruptive. Sit out the block and think about what you did. — [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] ([[User talk:Daniel Case|talk]]) 01:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)}}
-== {{unblock|I did nothing wrong}} ==
 I merely corrected inaccurate or out of date information.