User talk:172.11.79.48

February 2023

Hello, I'm Andethyst. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Crash Course (YouTube)—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. Andethyst (talk) 16:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In what way was my edit not constructive? I do not wish to get into an edit war with you so will wait until tomorrow to revert the edit. I'm not sure if you have visited the crashcourse youtube channel but the comments are censored and the video's are certainly left leaning. If you feel I should exclude the left leaning, I don't understand why we are suppose to omit facts. The censorship of the comment section is 100% there. If we are describing accurate information of the channel, I don't see reasoning why valid facts should be omitted. 172.11.79.48 (talk) 16:08, 4 February 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 attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Meters (talk) 04:46, 5 February 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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Acroterion. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Andre🚐 04:47, 5 February 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 60 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors.

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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 04:52, 5 February 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).

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

Request reason:

It literally says I will be blocked without more warnings and I did not do anything but try to respond and I was blocked. I am 100% confused. Do we allow law enforcement to say you will be shot if you proceed and than just shoot at people? Seems like that's the wikipedia policy. 172.11.79.48 (talk) 04:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

An admin decided to block you after you received several warnings for harassment. You do not seem to be denying the harassment. Your posts on this page show that you are a poor fit for Wikipedia. After the block expires, you should make constructive contributions, if not longer blocks will follow. PhilKnight (talk) 06:21, 5 February 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.

Censorship

I did not do anything against wikipedia rules. I was warned for next time and before next time blocked. My edit was on a talk page, where it was deleted and I went to talk page of the person who deleted it. Do you guys know the rules you make? Seems you don't. 172.11.79.48 (talk) 05:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Groomers are allowed to name call

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).

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

Request reason:

Wikipedia filters out comments that use the word t r 0ll. I was name called a t r 0ll. This honestly is not very productive as words describing the g r 00 mer actions being filtered and not permitted in the post makes it very difficult to appeal. 172.11.79.48 (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Block on this IP is now expired. That said, when you call someone a fascist, yes, you will be called a troll. If you don't want to be called a troll, act in a civil manner. If you have grievances with other users's behavior, WP:ANI is the proper forum- but I would think very carefully before bringing someone there. 331dot (talk) 19:29, 16 February 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.

April 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Steven Crowder, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:36, 18 April 2024 (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.

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.