User talk:94.173.144.36

February 2018

Your recent editing history 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 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. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 10:36, 10 February 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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for long-term abuse.

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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 11:39, 10 February 2018 (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 morning I noticed that @Yamla:'s talk page was missing a few archive links so I added them. Yamla reverted claiming "vandalism" but I think he was referring to SineBot's edit, not mine. Anyway, the position now is that there is a link to Archive 21 which actually links to Archive 20, a link to Archive 22 which actually links to Archive 20, a link to Archive 23 which actually links to Archive 20, a link to Archive 24 which actually links to Archive 20, and a link to Archive 25 which actually links to Archive 20. SineBot's intervention made my edit look like vandalism, and after viewing Yamla's talk page @Bishonen: blocked me for "long-term abuse" with an invitation to appeal. I feel this is somewhat unfair, since somebody claimed "Yamla's mother is a c--------" and wasn't blocked at all.

Unblock requests are expected to be formulated in a certain way (see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive296#Marshallsumter unban request for an example of how to do it), but before I start on mine, Bishonen please explain the criteria you applied when deciding to block so that I can ensure my submissions will be relevant. Bishapod, Bishonen, Bishzilla, Yamla and anyone else watching, have a good weekend and happy Valentine's Day. 94.173.144.36 (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my knowledge, the above statement about fixing my talk page, is accurate. --Yamla (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. 94.173.144.36 (talk) 18:31, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: you only have 23 archives! You may be saving yourself work for the future but I thought I'd mention it. All the best, 94.173.144.36 (talk) 18:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll respond, just once. My block had nothing to do with Yamla's talk page. What I viewed was your edit warring to insert an attack post on ANI. I didn't block you for three months merely for the ANI business, clearly, even though it was fairly nasty, but for long term abuse. You were obviously evading blocks to other IPs, as well as to at least one name account, and WP:DUCK applies. But if you appeal this block, and if the reviewing admin wants to shorten the block, I will leave that to them. Bishonen | talk 11:03, 11 February 2018 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: Here's how I think it plays out. Obviously your input will be welcome. With regard to blocks on IPs, GorillaWarfare knows about this. An IP was declared to be a sockpuppet of "Abnormallylong" who engaged in some rather prurient editing, and "Abnormallylong" was declared to be a sockpuppet of "Vote x for Change" without going through the recognised procedures (i.e. SPI). It's routine to unblock editors to allow them to participate in discussion. In a case where the IP is unblocked and convinces the community to unban editing may continue via the IP. It may be that there are blocked registered accounts in addition, but where a registered editor agrees a limit to one account blocks on other registered accounts are irrelevant. 94.173.144.36 (talk) 13:01, 11 February 2018 (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.