User talk:98.242.192.79

Further disruption will result in a full block

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:34, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, I'm LilianaUwU. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Blackamoor (decorative arts)—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 03:01, 21 December 2022 (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 refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Blackamoor (decorative arts). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 21 December 2022 (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 your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. SHB2000 (talk) 08:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This makes no sense. Why are my edits "disruptive," but not those of the editors who keep editing after me? What makes them special? It's "LilianaUwU" and "SHB2000" who are being disruptive. 98.242.192.79 (talk) 08:05, 21 December 2022 (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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Blackamoor (decorative arts). EnIRtpf09b^{chat with me} 08:06, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have not committed any vandalism. You are the one vandalizing. Check your privilege. 98.242.192.79 (talk) 08:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read WP:NPOV? Also, I don't know what "privilege" you're referring to, but I nor EnIRtpf09b have sysop privileges. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:09, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My edits were viewpoint neutral. It is a fact that criticism of "blackamoors" as "racist" is made by ideological leftists. (I offered no commentary on whether leftist liberalism is true.) And it is a fact that the critic cited did not, in fact, offer any evidence of her assertions. These are objective facts, not opinions. 98.242.192.79 (talk) 08:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you also read WP:RS and WP:V? Please provide reliable sources too. EnIRtpf09b^{chat with me} 08:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

The sources are the very articles themselves. It's widely known that it is only leftists who consider blackamoors to be "racist." The article, as it now stands, says they are "considered" racist as if this is a universally accepted fact. Also, the fact that the leftist author quoted by the article did not cite any evidence for her opinion is obvious from the very sources cited in the article. Literally no evidence is cited in the source, only the leftist author's opinion. 98.242.192.79 (talk) 08:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Completely missed the point. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for edit warring.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:09, 21 December 2022 (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.