User talk:50.212.14.35

January 2020

Hello, I'm TK421bsod. I noticed that you recently removed content from White Americans without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. TK421bsod (talk) 16:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 16:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

New message from UnnamedUser

Hello, 50.212.14.35. You have new messages at Talk:White Americans.
Message added 17:59, 13 January 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please do not revert edits anymore on the article, and instead discuss on the talk page. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 17:59, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Ilhan Omar, you may be blocked from editing. WMSR (talk) 19:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

How was any of that disruptive editing? What are you even talking abut?50.212.14.35 (talk) 20:37, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Acroterion (talk) 18:08, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 do explain how this was a personal attack in any way? I've gotten to the point where I don't believe any of you actually know what you're talking about. Instead you make baseless threats to silence anyone you disagree with. It's pathetic. 50.212.14.35 (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours to prevent you from evading blocks.

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 ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2020 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Undwer what circumstances have I been blocked? What am I evading? I only have one active account. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for this. Why do editors always choose to abuse their power? Wikipedia has become such a joke for power hungry people who don't get their way. ??50.212.14.35 (talk) 16:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As by your own admission you have an account, the block is clearly appropriate. If you wish to be unblocked, sign in with your account and make the request there. You'll want to read WP:GAB before you do so, so you can avoid inappropriate unblock requests like this one. Yamla (talk) 17:23, 12 March 2020 (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.

June 2021

Hello, I'm JPxG. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Karen Fann—because it 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. jp×g 18:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year 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 ~~~~}}. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:16, 15 June 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Just looking for clarification on why my IP was blocked? And may have a few other questions if you are OK with answering them. 50.212.14.35 (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given the text directly above this, it appears that this IP is blocked due to evading another block. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 12:19, 24 June 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here 50.212.14.35 (talk) 12:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 12:54, 24 June 2021 (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.

Could you explain to me how I was committing block evasion? So I have nothing to do with that IP address. But thank you.

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.