User talk:124.37.45.134

February 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Talk:Cybercrime, 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. -- intgr [talk] 08:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Talk:Interpol, 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. -- intgr [talk] 08:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Response to "February 2018"

Dear user, thank you for noticing the contributions made, and rest assured that the contributions have been reviewed and are based on documented fact. Thank you for your allowance of time to cite the facts, and in light of such allowance, I have decided to re-up the contributions (which you had deleted) but not to the article itself rather to the talkpage of the article, as "shared material" awaiting referencing. I noticed you have some experience with "DNS" recorded facts, so I welcome fellow-wikipedians (including yourself) to verify the facts concerning this recorded case of cybercrime, namely the `cybercriminal misappropriation of hydro dot net`. I@m sure we all agree that such is in keeping with the policies, guidlines, and the spirit of wikipedia. Cheers.

124.37.45.134 (talk)

Please stop posting your unverifiable conspiracy theories on Wikipedia. Even if you could cite individual elements of the story with primary sources like DNS records, those cannot be used to support your narrative, which would require a secondary source. Otherwise it's just synthesis (original research). And despite edit warring for years under may different IP addresses, so far you have provided no concrete sources and your latest attempt is just a cop-out. Just stop attempting to add this to Wikipedia please. -- intgr [talk] 09:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Talk:Cybercrime. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- intgr [talk] 09:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Response to March 2018 INTGR Dude, shmude, gender neutral or whatever, you cannot continue your disruptive deletions, whether you term it a "cop" out or not, cease and desist as if action was merited there are other perhaps more qualified wikipedians who can deal with this sort of shizzle, out. Verifiabilty is part and parcel with DNS records. Don`t waste your time, you`re smart enough to ACTUALLY IMPROVE ARTICLES, thus it can only be recommended that you do so, minus the deletionism. Better usage. 124.37.45.134 (talk) 19:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Interpol. -- intgr [talk] 20:03, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You MAY NOT block wikipeia contributors based on FALSE PRETENSES, regardless of your false pretenses. Stop wasting ppls time and seek productivity, plz. thnx

If you continue to ignore the Wikipedia policies we have brought to your attention and to make edits that violate those policies, you will be blocked from editing. See Blocking policy. General Ization ^Talk 20:10, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the most recent example, the source you cited says nothing at all about the Chiba District Prosecutor, so your claim that it does is false and the content is unsourced. General Ization ^Talk 20:12, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to improve the article, if you agree or disagree with the edits made. Good day further.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for block evasion.

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 ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

{unblock|reason}

This is a notice of requirement to ease illegal and reprehensible blockade;

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).

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

Request reason:

Narita Airport Corporation was hacked whether you like it or not; the authorities were notified whether you like it or not; the authorities decided to take action, whether you like it or not; that is all fine and well however, illicit targetting and blocking of BONA FIDE CONTRIBUTORS violates the ethics and policies of wikipedia and throws into doubt the decency of wikipedian involved in such actions. Extricate Oneself AdOrientum

Decline reason:

You are blocked because you are believed to be someone evading a block on their account. You need to address this and only this in your unblock request. Well, that and you need to unconditionally retract your legal threat, as per WP:NLT, or indicate your legal action has completed. Yamla (talk) 20:47, 22 March 2018 (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.

DaiNi{unblock|reason}

Second time around, regardless of the FACTS of the matter, one is believed. The block was evasive in that those seeking to censor and block the IP contributor MAY BE SOMEHOW INVOLVED IN CONCEALMENT OF CYBERCRIME, but hey, stay away from Cambridge Analytics, Akamai, AMDOCS, Facebook, etc, just now (March 2018). Such aforementioned concealment concerns material evidence of the "cybercriminal misappropriation of hydro dot net" (aussie Ingenico of France), and if you don`t like it, don`t involve yourself in any way other than an unblock. k. bye.

One final warning. You have access to this talk page solely so you can request an unblock, during which you must address your violation of WP:BLOCK and WP:NLT. Any other use will result in you losing access to this page. --Yamla (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Several wikipedia editors/admins have ABUSED THEIR PRIVILEGES regarding this IP contributor, last chance.

Talk page access revoked for the duration of your block. This leaves you with WP:UTRS, which you are free to use so long as you address your violation of WP:BLOCK and WP:NLT. --Yamla (talk) 21:32, 22 March 2018 (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.