User talk:79.70.70.215

April 2023

Hello, I'm Roger 8 Roger. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Yorkshire dialect have been undone because they 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:38, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roger 8 Roger, why? I consider them to be constructive and an increase of the accuracy of the article.

Yorkshire Dialect is based on Norse, with influences from Old English.

The current article has them simply the wrong way round.

Wikimedia guidelines champion accuracy, whereas you are encouraging the continuation of misleading information.

Explain. 79.70.70.215 (talk) 12:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a late April Fools joke from yourself yesterday?

White Rabbit. 79.70.70.215 (talk) 12:51, 2 April 2023 (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 stop. If you continue to remove maintenance templates without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Halifax transmitting station, you may be blocked from editing. You cannot unilaterally remove an AfD template. Please comment on the actual discussion instead. 10mmsocket (talk) 14:16, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One did comment on the Actual discussion, no instead about it. 79.70.70.215 (talk) 14:23, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10mmSocket you're a Deletionist, of course you would push idiologically to delete information, you ffeel information should only exist freely acessably for a select few, and you would rather obscure information and merge articles than exist in an Open-Access Wikipedia.

Watch out for 10mm's. 79.70.70.215 (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2023 (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 at York 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 15:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The edit warrer is DragonOfBatley.

I'm keeping with Convention, you're breaking Wikipedia Guidelines and Wikimedia Values by selectively warning one user over another. 79.70.70.215 (talk) 15:54, 2 April 2023 (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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've provided No Evidence Mitch. 79.70.70.215 (talk) 17:12, 2 April 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

There's literally no Disruptive editing, just because thy have an idiological agenda, doesn't mean the edits are disruptive. Point me to 1 True Example of Disruption, not just your emotive feelings and opinions. You're Breaking Wikimedia guidelines.79.70.70.215 (talk) 17:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Closing duplicate request. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:12, 2 April 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here 79.70.70.215 (talk) 17:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Closing duplicate request RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:12, 2 April 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

There's literally no Disruptive editing, just because thy have an idiological agenda, doesn't mean the edits are disruptive. Point me to 1 True Example of Disruption, not just your emotive feelings and opinions. You're Breaking Wikimedia guidelines.79.70.70.215 (talk) 17:08, 2 April 2023 (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. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:13, 2 April 2023 (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.

(show)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:22, 2 April 2023 (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.

If I could indef an IP for those comments I surely would. Instead TPA has been revoked until the block is over. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:23, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Discospinster. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Wet-bulb conditions have been undone because they 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. ... discospinster _talk 21:59, 22 April 2023 (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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month to prevent further vandalism. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:06, 23 April 2023 (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 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.