User talk:94.72.252.103

April 2013

Hello, I'm Fraggle81. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Birdholme because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Fraggle81 (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lee Ryan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Tentinator. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Lee Ryan because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can 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.  Tentinator  14:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

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

January 2014

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.  Yunshui 雲‍水 13:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, 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).

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

---

Request reason:

Why should there be a blanket block on public access for the rest for a public squabble between two others 94.72.252.103 (talk) 13:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

(1) I am unconvinced that any "public access" is affected. (2) It's not a question of "a public squabble between two others": it's a question of long-term disruptive editing and harassment by one person. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:45, 23 January 2014 (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.

Please read No legal threats. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Legal threats ? Where ? Doesn't seem to be any as far as I can see.

94.72.252.103 (talk) 14:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Bottom thread in this revision. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Reading with great interest. So why was it deleted since it appears to have had a significant impact on public access ?

94.72.252.103 (talk) 14:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Uummnn ... not convincing. If there are legal procedures in process (and it appears to be a big if, from what I can see) then why does an entire community that may wish to use the facility of an anonymous IP and contribute be blocked ? Seems to be using hammers to crack peanuts.

94.72.252.103 (talk) 14:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

---