User talk:122.104.137.25

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, to Dan Brown it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you.Modernist (talk) 03:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues on Dan Brown, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Modernist (talk) 14:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was not vandalism, vindicated by the fact that my edit remains on this article, apart from slight re-wording "Dan Brown claims to be a Christian" to "Dan Brown states on his website that he is a Christian". 122.104.137.25 (talk) 01:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 2008

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Evolution as theory and fact. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Gail (talk) 12:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Evolution as theory and fact. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 12:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for inserting false or misleading information into articles.. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, 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. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:57, 28 June 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 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).

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

Request reason:

I made factual edits on wikipedia

Decline reason:

Your edits were disruptive. In future, I suggest you establish consensus on the talk page, before making controversial changes. — PhilKnight (talk) 13:49, 28 June 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I started a discussion, but no one responded; therefore unable to reach a consensus

Decline reason:

Waiting seven minutes after your sole comment, and then re-inserting the language that kept getting removed, is hardly attempting to reach consensus. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:27, 28 June 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I never re-inserted the same edits, if you look at the history every edit pertains to something different. Several people reverted any edit I made, yet not a single one answered the discussion page?

Decline reason:

Your entire edit history has been nothing but disruptive and tendentious. Please refrain from further unblock requests; they will be considered disruptive and your user talk page will be semi-protected for the remainder of the block. — Daniel Case (talk) 22:45, 28 June 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

For the most part the basis of my block has been opinionated and bias

Decline reason:

What did I say? What did I say? It sure wasn't "please post argumentative unblock requests until the cows come home". It was "Please refrain from further unblock requests". You're done with this. Your talk page will be semi-protected for the remainder of the block. — Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 29 June 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.

Actually, since your block had expired, I am reblocking for another 12 hours for disruptive editing (abuse of the unblock template after a request to cease) and during this one you will not be making any such requests, at least not out here, as your page will be smei-protected for the duration. Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This edit was a clear attempt at deliberate deception. I hope that you understand why such practices are not tolerated. Gail (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I never re-inserted that same edit? I never broke 2RR let alone 3RR. Ownership shouldn't be taken over articles122.104.137.25 (talk) 21:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Please do not use talk pages such as Evolution as theory and fact for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you. Aunt Entropy (talk) 08:21, 22 July 2008 (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.