User talk:80.111.165.63

January 2019

Hello, I'm Ubiquity. I noticed that you recently removed content from Andrew Murray (trade unionist) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. ubiquity (talk) 16:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

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.

Please refrain from making test edits to Wikipedia pages, such as the one you made with this edit to Alexander Lukashenko, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 19:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

POV editing

Hello. I've noticed that all your edits to Belarus-related articles involve pro-government POV. Please cease or you will be blocked from editing. Thanks, Number 57 12:10, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

As you've continued, I'm afraid you've been blocked for 72 hours. You're welcome to make constructive edits when you return, but further edits in the same vein will result in a permanent block. Number 57 12:12, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock 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 ~~~~}}. Number 57 12:18, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Unblock me

@Number 57: You have breached WP:INVOLVED (see WP:TOOLMISUSE) I suggest you unblock me and make a report somewhere else otherwise I will be reporting you for administrator abuse which may lead to your administrator title being revoked once I am unblocked.80.111.165.63 (talk) 12:13, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: If you do not respond to this then I will be forced to take action for administrator abuse once my block expires. It certainly will not be a positive result for you.80.111.165.63 (talk) 12:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

I spotted you making POV edits, reverted you and warned you. You continued in the same vein. This is not what I would call involved. You are more than welcome to report me. I'll also add a block template above so you can appeal your block. Number 57 12:18, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: You were quite clearly involved in an edit dispute with me and you blocked me despite this. It is a textbook definition example of administrator abuse to do this. Again see WP:TOOLMISUSE80.111.165.63 (talk) 12:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

I was not in a dispute with you. I spotted you making dubious edits, asked you to stop and then blocked you when you didn't. Again, you're more than welcome to report me. Number 57 12:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: You literally just described what an edit dispute is. WP:MISUSE states "Conflict of interest or non-neutrality – Administrators should not normally use their tools in matters in which they are personally involved (for example, in a content dispute in which they are a party)." You were quite clearly personally involved. Your failure to undue your abuse of administrator privileges once pointed out will not look good for you when I report you.80.111.165.63 (talk) 12:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

OK, good luck with your report. Number 57 12:26, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: You too, you'll need it.80.111.165.63 (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

---