User talk:198.232.211.130

Welcome!

Interested in becoming a regular contributor to Wikipedia? Create an account!

Your host, daoutside.hanford.gov (198.232.211.130), is registered to Lockheed Martin Services and may be shared by multiple users of a government agency or facility, so you might receive messages on this page that were not intended for you.

To have your own user pages, keep track of articles you've edited in a watchlist, and have access to a few other special features, please consider registering an account! It's fast and free.

If you are autoblocked repeatedly, contact your network administrator and request it contact Wikimedia's XFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on its proxy servers so that blocks will affect only the intended user. Administrators: review contributions carefully if blocking this IP address or reverting its contributions. If a block is needed, consider a soft block using Template:Anonblock. In the event of vandalism from this IP address, abuse reports may be sent to its network administrator for investigation.

In the event of vandalism from this IP address, anonymous editing may be disabled. If you are an unregistered user operating from this address, note that it may be possible for your agency or facility's administration to determine who was making contributions from this address at any given time and abuse reports may be sent to its network administrator for further investigation.

Some government IP addresses are considered sensitive. If blocking this IP address, determine if Wikipedia:SIP applies; if so, follow directions.

Officials and network administrators, to monitor this IP address for vandalism, can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Unregistered editors using this IP address received messages on this talk page years ago. Since users of the IP address have likely changed, these messages have been removed. They can be viewed in the page history.

Your edit to Human chorionic gonadotropin

Hi there -- your edit to Human chorionic gonadotropin has been reverted because it is not consistent with Wikipedia's editing guidelines (please see Help:Editing and Wikipedia:Five_pillars for more information). You might wish to put a message on Talk:Human chorionic gonadotropin if you are looking for feedback or a discussion.

Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 20:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you for your efforts.

March 2013

Hello, I'm Escape Orbit. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to CatDog 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. Thanks! Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 23:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Pinethicket. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Rocky Mountain oysters 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. Thanks! Pinethicket (talk) 23:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

June 2013

Hello, I'm Capitalismojo. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Acesulfame potassium because it did not 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. Capitalismojo (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Battle on the Columbia concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Battle on the Columbia, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 00:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Battle on the Columbia

Hello 198.232.211.130. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Battle on the Columbia.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Battle on the Columbia}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 23:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

Hello, I'm Flyer22. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Dominic Raiola because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please 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. Flyer22 (talk) 23:37, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

July 2015

Hello, I'm Flyer22. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to List of foods and drinks named after places because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please 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. Flyer22 (talk) 21:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Edit war warning

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Your multiple edit reverts on 21 March to Supremacy Clause fits the definition of edit-warring. Please stop this behavior. Drdpw (talk) 17:56, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop your aggressive editing of Supremacy clause. If you do not agree with other people's edits, discuss your concerns on the article's talk page first. Do not change the good faith edits of others simply because you disagree. Drdpw (talk) 14:09, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not reverting, I am editing as allowed. You are the one reverting my edits and not citing one of the reasons for a revert as required by Wikipedia. I would kindly ask you to not revert my edits without a valid basis. I believe my edits are technically correct but I am open to you communicating to me if you wish to share your thoughts with me. 198.232.211.130 (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You do appear to be reverting other peoples edits and not following the correct procedures for solving disputes. Per WP:BRD your changes have been reverted and instead of discussing them on the talk page of the relevant article, you are restoring your own viewpoint with no discussion other than a dismissal of others opinions. noq (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:198.232.211.130 reported by User:North Shoreman (Result: ). Thank you. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you would start a notice of an edit war when I was the one who restored your edit. Other than that, you and I have had no interaction that I am aware of? Is there something specific you want to discuss with me? 198.232.211.130 (talk) 16:46, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. Your edit added back the material that you keep adding despite the objection of numerous editors. You reverted my edit. You ignored the formal warning issued by another editor to stop this behavior. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 17:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't revert any edit of yours. I have been ganged-up on by others for adding original material, this is true, but why you and not they would report me to Admin. seems contrived. I would suggest you wait until you and I have an actual controversy. As to the others they have only reverted my legitimate edits, why I do not know because they offer no reasons, which at a minimum would seem rather rude...wouldn't you agree? 198.232.211.130 (talk) 17:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear user at IP 198.232.211.130: If you continue edit warring, you will be blocked from editing. And, stop falsely stating that you are not edit warring. You've already made seven reverts today in the article on the Supremacy Clause. That is edit warring. And stop contradicting other editors who are pointing out that you are edit warring.

The burden is on you to justify your edits by discussing on the talk page for the relevant article, and by persuading other editors that you are right. The burden is on YOU, not on everyone else.

Your statement about the state of the law on the Tenth Amendment is actually more or less correct. However, being right about that is not enough. Please review Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Famspear (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IP, you should also read the page on WP:BRD. You've been bold and made a change, but it was reverted. You now need to discuss the change on the article talk page and get consensus. Continuing to revert as you are will end up with you blocked and/or the pages semi-protected which prevents IP and new accounts from editing that page. Ravensfire (talk) 18:51, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, you don't really care about anything other than your own view. It's quite obvious you'll continue to stick your fingers in your ear and ignore what everyone else is saying. Given that, I'll just wait until you're blocked and the articles protected. Ravensfire (talk) 19:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When I see behavior in Wikipedia like the behavior of IP 198.232.211.130, I am reminded of an old saying of mine regarding litigation: you can have the law on your side, the facts on your side, a good lawyer on your side, an able, honest and competent judge, and a fair and impartial jury -- and yet you can still lose your case. Being "right" about one particular point is not enough. Famspear (talk) 19:20, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To the contrary, I am anxious to dialogue to improve the information presented in the article. But you both (and others) dog-in-the-manger attitude and actions are not professional, not in harmony with Wikipedia policy and in my opinion quite rude. Who throws to the trash the honest and sincere work of another and does not even bother to state why? As for "honest and competent judge, and a fair and impartial jury" I can assure you that you have afforded me none. I have made no claim to being right but I do claim to following the rules to the best of my knowledge. Please respect my edits and please take the time to address concerns in the TALK page as directed by Wikipedia policy rather then defaming my efforts. I will work with you in an honest and respectful manner and hope that you can reciprocate. Should I be banned by Wikipedia for malicious acts against me, rather than protection from such acts, then I will know it is not an organization that I would want to be a part of anyway. Kind regards... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.232.211.130 (talk • contribs)

Ahh, such lovely balderdash. Your actions show the insincerity of your words. Number of edits by IP to the talk page - 0. Number of other editors supporting the IP - 0. Ravensfire (talk) 21:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note - semi protection requested for both pages. Ravensfire (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear user at IP address: No, you are not "anxious to dialogue." You have yet to even interact with other editors on the talk page for the article.

Your statement that you will work with others "in an honest and respectful manner" etc., is not credible. You have to actually work with others in that way. And no, no one has engaged in any malicious acts against you.

Repeatedly reverting other editors' reversions of YOUR posts -- and failing to discuss your reverts on the talk page for the related article -- are examples of edit warring. When you claim that you are not edit warring, you only reduce your credibility.

Wikipedia operates on the concept of consensus. It is a violation of Wikipedia rules for you to repeatedly re-insert edits that you like and then demand that other editors "respect your edits" while you fail to use the talk page for the article to try to persuade other editors of your position. That's what we mean by obtaining consensus. Famspear (talk) 22:27, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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. BethNaught (talk) 22:03, 24 March 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.

June 2016

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2015 Pac-12 Football Championship Game. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Arbor Fici (talk) 20:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Yakima, Washington— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please 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. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017 - United States dollar

Would that be the talk page where everyone except some fringe theory spouting anon says that it is NOT currently a commodity currency?--Khajidha (talk) 16:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Hello, I'm Shellwood. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to John C. Frémont— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please 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. Thanks. Shellwood (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Hello, I'm Classicwiki. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 18:55, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

September 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Pasco High School (Washington), you may be blocked from editing. ... discospinster _talk 20:52, 6 September 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.

Hello, I'm WJ94. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Ann Wigmore 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. WJ94 (talk) 16:23, 20 September 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.

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 198.232.211.130, removed content without giving an explanation. Please always provide an informative edit summary when removing content from pages. If 198.232.211.130 is a shared IP address and you did not do this, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors and further irrelevant notices.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Here are some other hints and tips:

I recommend that you get a username. You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and there are many benefits of having a username. (If you edit without a username, your IP address is used to identify you instead.)
When using talk pages, please sign your name at the end of your messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username (or IP address) and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Ashleyknowsthings (talk) 18:56, 25 January 2023 (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.