User talk:103.27.142.111

February 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Soyuz MS-22, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 16:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

About Mohun Bagan AC page

I don't know how to reply to you there, so starting a discussion here. Please let me know which specific facts are not already cited, then I will cite them. "Ranking" after header was not my doing, but yes I somehow missed it. And I did not delete the ATK Mohun Bagan (Youth) page either. Anyway, I will add their records in the Mohun Bagan AC (Youth) page as soon as possible. If possible, please help. @Ramit.mukherjee.1994 you too please help. Mohunbagani (talk) 12:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mohunbagani to bring to fact youth team started playing just this year onl so if you are adding the team records add for just 1 year 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:07, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Of course. There is nothing else to add anyway. Mohunbagani (talk) 17:04, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster

Your edits to Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster may be valid but you provided no explanation for your changes or any evidence to support them and that is why I reverted them. Please use talk:Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster to explain the changes you want to make, citing Wikipedia:reliable sources to support any assertions you make.

You don't have to have a Wikipedia account, but you might find it more convenient to create one. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman, the Space Shuttle SRBs are reused and modified to 5 segment boosters on SLS. I was thinking of adding the SLS booster characteristics to the infobox. Looks like it won't suite in main infobox, so with your permission can i add another infobox in the "Current, Future and proposed uses" section's subsection called "Space Launch System (SLS)". It's because the space shuttle age has gone and anyone coming to this page would like to know about SLS boosters thank you 103.27.142.111 (talk) 06:55, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

And @John Maynard Friedman, for citations visit sls's infobox and https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/largest-solid-rocket-booster 103.27.142.111 (talk) 06:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

it would be best if you could put your proposal at the article talk page rather than here. That way, people who know more about the subject than I do (a low bar!) can evaluate it. But you seem to be on the right lines: as I said, the issue really only arose because you didn't give any reasons for your changes nor provide any supporting evidence. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit summaries

It would be really helpful to other editors if you would use the edit summary box to explain what you are doing and (more importantly) why you are doing it. Please read Help:Edit summary which explains the principle. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Space exploration, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. NP83 (talk) 04:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

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 do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Adakiko (talk) 07:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Expedition 69 has been accepted

Expedition 69, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 06:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Mattdaviesfsic 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:48, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

May 2023

Your recent editing history at International Space Station shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@331dot this is an unnecessary edit war i am just coming and updating and correcting that page. I made bigger corrections earlier too. Please read my edit comments before reverting. Can you please restore my version. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 08:38, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

You must discuss your edits on the talk page and not edit war, even if you think you are correct. Everyone in an edit war thinks that they are correct. You must achieve a consensus for your edits. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to International Space Station, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:37, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@CycloneYoris this is an unnecessary edit war i am just coming and updating and correcting that page. I made bigger corrections earlier too. Please read my edit comments before reverting. Can you please restore my version. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@CycloneYoris i clearly wrote, "this is 100% non-vandalism and just error fixing alongside updation after yesterday's spacewalk. Head over to "List of International Space Station spacewalks" in wiki no more references is needed avoided executing unnecessary page reverts, my earlier edits on this same page prove my honesty, sincereity and faithfulness". Please spend a little time in going to this page rather than blindly reverting 103.27.142.111 (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@331dot@CycloneYoris

VKD-56

Ninth in a series of spacewalks to outfit Nauka and to prepare ERA for operations. The spacewalkers used ERA to pick up the radiator with the arm and relocated it to Nauka at the end of the spacewalk. The spacewalkers closed valves on the nitrogen jumpers, removed covers over the nitrogen jumpers, disconnected the radiator heater cable and capped it, removed bolts and launch restraints, and transferred the radiator over to Nauka and installed it into a socket on the forward face where it will be deployed at the end of EVA 4. As part of get-ahead tasks, the spacewalkers prepared the airlock for transfer to Nauka on the next spacewalk and stowed the ERA adapter on the airlock. Because of time and issues with matting the radiator the task to jettison the covers was moved to the next spacewalk. This was the longest spacewalk of this expedition and a critical one to get the lab activated.

VKD-57

Tenth in a series of spacewalks to outfit Nauka and to prepare ERA for operations. Prokopyev and Petelin removed bolts and covers, disconnected cables and used ERA to transfer the airlock over to Nauka, where it was installed on the forward facing port. Once the airlock was installed, they mated cables and jettisoned their trash, which included hardware and covers from the previous spacewalks and this spacewalk. The spacewalk faced a delay when ERA entered an uncontrolled roll, placing the airlock out of alignment. Prokopyev and Petelin improvised with a little elbow grease, rotated the airlock into the correct position and got it latched in place. The spacewalk faced another delay when tape was found on the electrical connectors, requiring Prokopyev to cut it before the cables were connected.

VKD-58

Eleventh and final spacewalk to outfit Nauka and to prepare ERA for operations. To wrap up work on Nauka, the cosmonauts deployed the radiator, and installed nitrogen and ammonia jumpers to cool the Russian Segment and connected the radiator to electrical power, hydraulics, and mechanical connections. As a getahead task while the radiator was being filled with coolant the cosmonauts installed gap spanners on ERA's boom to allow for translation on future spacewalks.

I plead to restore my version instead of expecting a edit-revert-edit scenario 103.27.142.111 (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

The place to make this argument is on the article talk page, Talk:International Space Station. My only interest here is in preventing disruption- I have no idea if you are correct or not- because it doesn't matter in terms of edit warring. Please discuss. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Can you please stop pinging me? I did not revert you because of the edit war. I reverted you because you removed a template without giving a valid reason for doing so. Thanks. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:04, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@331dot (i didn't wanted to ping you again, it's annoying i know) i have done what you said. Btw read the talk page as it is a older page, replies to topics on iss' talk page~0. Till then, the page would have been stayed in the state of a year or endless state of misinformation and wrong arrangement, mostly the discussion go into the archive. I have read the talk page's history. I have no problem in staying blocked for 72 hours but please do the right thing the page needs.

Thanking you in advance, 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

No, you didn't do what I said, if you had, I wouldn't have blocked you. Discussion is not posting one thing on the talk page and then resuming the edit war. You must get a consensus for your edit to remain or be added; it's not up to others to get a consensus to keep it out. Admins do not settle content disputes. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@331dot ok i was thinking about discussions like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1075111812 that got archived without any discussion. See the history many get archived without any answer in that talk page.

Btw i forgot to cite my earlier edits https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1149978471&oldid=1149849752 on that page that were like this only and without getting such notices.103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@331dot not a single reply to any discussion in 2years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_Space_Station 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

thats why i never discussed topics in their talk page 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

These are not acceptable reasons to edit war or edit without discussion. You can make an unblock request if you believe I have erred. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

ok can i get consensus here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring like citing the iss talk page discussion. i got it from dispute resolution page linked with your block notice @331dot 103.27.142.111 (talk) 10:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing from certain pages (International Space Station) for a period of 72 hours for edit warring.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for block evasion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

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.

• Now blocked sitewide and for a week for block evasion. 331dot (talk) 20:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

  What should I do know@331dot. All are reverting but not providing reasons. Some gave and i have applied those but the problem persists, you only say if you have to put cat or mat in living things section of a topic would you put both or just cat. Same case is here. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 14:17, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  You need to stop harassing other users to respond to you. You need to stop reverting. You have been given reasons. You need to listen to the community and dial back your enthusiasm about edits to the ISS article. 331dot (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  But most of them state not helpful, etc without explanation of the errors. Only genomrailroader said we need citations and that i added.@331dot (i know it's harrassing, but thing about my harrasment (you work a week on your faults laid down and then when you edit correctly so issue arises that is not explained)) 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:19, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  There are no deadlines here. Let things take their time. 331dot (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  But in this case you have to comply with the fact that International Space Station though has sub pages to deal with recent changes but still remains a candidate for vigorous Recentism. The last portion to complete this article, i mean ISS completion and keep the page (except it's iss Visiting Vehicles or properly the operations section) stable was mlm outfittings but it's a false statement shown to other users that mlm outfittings like rtod radiator, means of attachment of large payloads, era spare elbow joint is pressurized and that mlm airlock and rtod radiator is not operational @331dot 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:28, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

  As you see the structure diagram keynotes says commissioned pressurized modules in blue, unpressurized section in yellow and non commissioned modules in brown. I am just doing this casual thing but this has become the most chaotic thing. For Recentism, we lost the best infobox image of ISS in favour of a recent inferior one. Reality is good but too harsh to accept. Till axiom orbital segment does not launch and era portable workpost is not commissioned the page's structure section won't be disturbed for over 3-4 years and will remain stablized till then. @331dot 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

  Language translations of ISS are far away and are outdated and this version won't want that to happen with itself. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:37, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to International Space Station did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! CityOfSilver 02:34, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

my intent is summarised in talk page@CityOfSilver 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Of iss 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

I know. I'm not sure how that squares with "Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make." Every single edit, no exceptions, should have explanatory text in the edit summary box. CityOfSilver 02:38, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok i will mind it next time 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Idontknowwhattouseasmyusername300 (talk) 15:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

I do broken edits that is my additions spanning over 5-10 edits so less summarises but will summarise mostly from now 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

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 do not add or change content, as you did at John Shoffner, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. – ².O.^Boxing 15:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Is Italian Wikipedia and wikidata wrong????!@Squared.Circle.Boxing 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:58, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

They're not WP:Reliable sources. – ².O.^Boxing 16:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

So added his racing career stater@Squared.Circle.Boxing 103.27.142.111 (talk) 16:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at International Space Station, you may be blocked from editing. Notrealname1234 (talk) 18:54, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 19:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

my block is totally unbiased. Before explaining what i did i would like to represent the working of currently docked/berthed and scheduled missions subsection. :The Boeing Starliner-1 mission is arbitrarily assumed to be the end of scheduled missions subsection. Any mission before that is placed in this subsection. As time flies the added mission comes on top. When the Mission has occurred. If it is a modular mission it is removed and if it is a visiting spacecraft mission it is placed in currently docked/berthed subsection. Once the mission is over it is removed and forgotten forever (human spaceflights to ISS and uncrewed iss spaceflights page store them) and if it or any module needs relocation, the thing' s relocation moment is kept in relocation subsection. I was docking this same thing and got reverted thought i added a nasaspaceflight.com ref and this thing is common in past https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1124083440&oldid=1123930032 and i was also allowed to do this in past even when page reviewer rights came https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1149978471&oldid=1149849752 . On 22nd only someone did the same thing for Axiom Mission 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1156407400&oldid=1156365589 today i was doing for the Progress MS-23 dubbed as Progress 84 by NASA. I did and a user reverted it saying it's unreferenced when i had added the NSF ref. I explained him later but he countered it saying "rsw-2021" is undefined then. Though this ref is outdated only needed for Progress MS-17, to avoid controversy i added it to the last usage of this ref but someone reverted it saying unexplained when others don't explain it when they edit this. Please unblock me and allow me to conduct the edit. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 04:05, 25 May 2023 (UTC) :Another thing is all are reverting my edits for mlm outfittings but not providing valid detailed reasons acting as blind like asking refs when refs are already provided by me in my edits. Some gave and i have applied those but the problem persists, please say if you have to put cat or mat in living things section of a topic would you put both or just cat. Same case is here in mlm outfittings. Someone placed all mlm outfittings in pressurized section when only mlm airlock shk is to be added and others must move to unpressurized section. I am also making these modules active but that is not allowed. I don't know why. Only because i am an IP editor and don't want to disclose my identity all are reverting my edits on iss page where you go and have a watch that all other pages are accepting my edits and i even still as an IP editor created Expedition 69 page. I have got the notice of disrupting editing which I have explained at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_Space_Station#Reasons_for_my_edits_considered_as_disruption and for personal attacks think about attacks on me reverting my edits without things. "It takes days to publish an edit and a second to revert it." My edits are supported by

Rendering of the ISS Visiting Vehicle Launches, Arrivals and Departures. Live link at nasa.gov.

.103.27.142.111 (talk) 04:11, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I apologise for the uncivil behaviour but it was driven by... Nope. The policy is "no personal attacks", not "no personal attacks unless something really irritates you". Your uncivil behavior was "driven by" your decision to say the things you said, period. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:08, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

---

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.

@Notrealname1234 and @Mikeblas can you intervene 103.27.142.111 (talk) 05:37, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

This thing needs a solution otherwise the iss page will be outdated. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 05:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Also don't think this is one in all kind of thing @Mikeblas List of active Solar System probes Future of space exploration are pages where non active probes and active probes are deleted respectively with a blip of eye. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 05:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@103.27.142.111 im not a admin, so i cannot review Notrealname1234 (talk) 11:46, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

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.

Sorry, I'm not inclined to be involved in your appeal. While I'm glad you fixed the errors you introduced to the ISS article, your edit summaries were uncivil and it seems like you've got a pattern of less than desirable behaviour. -- Mikeblas (talk) 13:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I apologise for the uncivil behaviour but it was driven by the reverts for mlm outfittings. i just said casually dumb for if that mlm outfittings revert happened for this that happened (don't mind it and take in your heart @Mikeblas bro (dumb=reverting without seeing why i edited or unknowingly useless revert)). 103.27.142.111 (talk) 14:51, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@103.27.142.111 also why didnt you just create a account Notrealname1234 (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't wish to create an account 103.27.142.111 (talk) 01:37, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

@Notrealname1234 for time being till my block period is over or an earlier unblock is given if you think my version is needed you can restore it. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 14:55, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Do not ask others to edit for you while blocked. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

i am not asking him to do me a favour or do from my side i am asking his opinion after Mikeblas stated that my edit was appreciable. @331dot 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

While blocked you only have access to this page to request to be unblocked, you shouldn't be discussing anything else. 331dot (talk) 16:39, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok 103.27.142.111 (talk) 02:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

I've been looking at this request, and I have a question for you. Do you believe your edit summaries here and here are appropriate in the context of our policy on personal attacks against other editors? SQL^{Query Me!} 21:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

@SQL i have said it and saying again, "I apologise for the uncivil behaviour but it was driven by the reverts for mlm outfittings. i just said casually dumb for if that mlm outfittings revert happened for this that happened (don't mind it and take in your heart Mikeblas bro (dumb=reverting without seeing why i edited or unknowingly useless revert))" i had attacks on previous edits as reverts 103.27.142.111 (talk) 03:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

---