User talk:96.57.1.171

July 2017

Hello, I'm Classicwiki. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Cameroon have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Classicwiki (talk) (ping me please, I don't watch pages) 19:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

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

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Aiptasia pallida. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

• If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Aiptasia pallida was changed by 96.57.1.171 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.986026 on 2017-07-14T15:04:59+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:11, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

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

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Widr (talk) 15:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

This is a public computer and I don't know what cretin vandal did this editing but we need access for our institution. 96.57.1.171 (talk) 15:37, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The vandalism from this IP was fairly intense with the latest incident occurring a mere 19 minutes before you submitted your unblock request. Under these circumstances, it's better to leave the block in place. Favonian (talk) 16:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

---

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.

You're absurd. You're a power hungry, absurd fool. What does the timing of any of this have to do with anything? REINSTATE ME I HAVE TO BE READY TO SHARE MY KNOWLEDGE!!!