User talk:97.112.236.168

This account is a suspected sockpuppet of Kompress0 (talk · contribs · logs) and has been blocked indefinitely.
Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

December 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass other editors. - wolf 06:48, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So when are you and Jacona going to be blocked for harassing me and reverting my valid edits?

Oh that's right, you aren't, because of bias.

I tried being a productive, contributing member but apparently that wasn't wanted. So beat it, dweeb. 97.112.236.168 (talk) 06:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When are you gonna grow up and learn there are rules here, just like most places in society? Evading your indef block and socking to stalk and harrass Jacona and I to vandalize articles by reverting our edits is accomishing nothing. You should refrain from editing Wikipedia in any way for 12 months, then apply for a clean start via UTRS. Or, just find a new hobby. But either way, this... is childish, and needs to stop. - wolf 07:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, no. I tried doing things right. I even gave up on the RAS syndrome page and went on to make additions to other articles that were reverted by Jacona out of pure spite because of her racial obsession. I agree though, continually reverting my valid, sourced edits was incredibly childish and is what led us to this. 97.112.236.168 (talk) 07:07, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I don't think you'll ever be allowed to edit WP. Even if you were a good boy for a year and were able to get unblocked, WP:CIR would still be a roadblock for you returning. Find something new. Enjoy your life. Good luck to you. - wolf 07:13, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Or, we could come to an understanding, and I go about being a contributing member of Wikipedia since the only reason I was ever even banned in the first place was you and Jacona's whiney asses. 97.112.236.168 (talk) 07:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 07:12, 8 December 2022 (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.

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

I tried being a productive contributing member, but a few spiteful users and bias in their favor kept that from working out. 97.112.236.168 (talk) 07:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC) [reply]

Decline reason:

Your exchange above does not argue in favor of you being released early from a fairly short block. Not with that level of incivility. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:40, 8 December 2022 (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.

97.112.236.168 (talk) 07:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request too

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).

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

Request reason:

"Your exchange above does not argue in favor of you being released early from a fairly short block. Not with that level of incivility." Trust me, wolfboy and Jacona deserve just about every disparaging remark that can be thrown at them. This entire fiasco is because of bias against me in their favor when it came to valid, sourced edits simply because I was a new unregistered user. 97.112.236.168 (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Block extended to one week to give you a chance to read our policies. Unblock requests like this are completely inappropriate. Yamla (talk) 14:13, 8 December 2022 (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.

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.