User talk:100.0.165.202

I can. And I absolutely will use whatever means necessary to remove this content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:AF (talk) 20:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Do not use multiple IP addresses to vandalize Wikipedia, like you did at Quarterback. Such attempts to avoid detection or circumvent the blocking policy will not succeed. You are welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia but your recent edits have been reverted or removed. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Meters (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{

Your recent editing history at Quarterback shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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 your 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. Meters (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as done at Quarterback. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 21:18, 24 July 2016 (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.

Allow me to be clear, Rob...I'm not going to stop. Ever. Until that content is removed. You do whatever talking you need to do with whomever you need to do it with. You block whatever you think you need to for as long as you think you can. Rest assured, it's coming down again. That part of the article IN NO WAY DESCRIBES A SINGLE, SOLITARY THING about the position of quarterback. It describes a possibly bigoted organization peripherally related to the game...it doesn't describe the position of quarterback or any aspect of it. It's sole purpose is to evoke white guilt. It is irrelevant and it's coming down again.

Count on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:0:803:0:0:0:A1 (talk) 21:33, 24 July 2016 (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.