User talk:76.16.72.26

Administrator impersonation[edit]

This irregular schtick from this IP of posting on WP:ANI in the guise of an administrator is tiresome. If it happens again I'll block you. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I AM NOT AN ADMINISTRATOR. Nothing that is stated from this account should be assumed to be coming from an administrator. 76.16.72.26 (talk) 16:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- As Chris has pointed out, your (continued) comments to ANI are not particularly helpful. Adding what is the equivalent of "me too" replies doesn't add clarity or information and is distracting. I recommend finding some nice articles to edit. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 09:33, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for disruptive editing after being warned, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:38, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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).

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

Request reason:

This is a bad block. Since when is it against policy to thank people for reporting something to ANI? I didn't take any positions on their reports, but simply thanked them. I am not an admin nor was I trying to insert myself into the issues. With all of the drama and silliness on ANI why am I being targeted? In addition 48 hours is extreme excessive. 76.16.72.26 (talk) 09:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were asked to stop what you were doing, as it was unhelpful and misleading (for example, where do you get "We have added this to the dispute database" from? IF there was a dispute database and IF something had been added to it, it would be up to the person doing the adding to say so, not you). You did not stop. You got blocked. And you will not be unblocked early unless you address the behavior that got you blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:22, 22 August 2012 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

I realize someone asked me to stop something but that doesn't mean I am required by policy to do that. Nothing that I wrote is against policy. I was simply thanking people for adding their frustrations to the ANI database and that they would be tended to. What specific policy did I violate? I was just trying to make ANI a more friendly place. 76.16.72.26 (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:51, 22 August 2012 (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 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).

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

Request reason:

Again, this block is inconsistent with policy. What specific policy disallows me to thank people for submitting their concerns to the ANI database? If you can point me to that specific policy then I can acknowlegde that I have erred. 76.16.72.26 (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your edits are not contributing towards improving the encyclopedia, and are disruptive as they are unnecessary, clutter discussions, and increase the likelihood of edit conflicts on an already busy and time-sensitive noticeboard. You were asked to stop several times and continued to do so, and are not showing any indication that you will stop or otherwise constructively edit. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 22:42, 22 August 2012 (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.

Well, there isn't a specific policy that says "Don't post pictures of yourself at ANI", but if you did it repeatedly you'd be blocked for disruption. You see, not everything works by the letter of policy - many parts of Wikipedia work by consensus and common sense.

The ANI board is for reporting things to admins and for admins to decide what admin action may or may not be necessary - though anyone is welcome to post there, it is administered by admins. It does not make sense for a unregistered IP editor to be acting there as an adminstrator/manager of the board - whether that means thanking people for reporting there or talking nonsense about things being recorded on the "dispute database".

Now, you don't get to make demands here - you either agree to stop what you were doing, as asked, or you stay blocked. And if your next post here does not address that and continues with the same line of argument, I will revoke your ability to edit this page for the duration of your block. And do be aware that if you repeat this behaviour again once your block expires, you should expect to be blocked for longer. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So thanking people for reporting their concerns ANI database is somehow "managing" ANI? Absolutely not. This is more hatred of IPs and demonstrates the utter exclusivity of wikipedia- the encyclopedia that only administrators can edit. Please keep this IP blocked. Wikipedia is a cruel and horrible place. 76.16.72.26 (talk) 21:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You must not remove declined unblock requests while unblocked, but you can do so once your blocked has expired. As you clearly do not wish to seek unblock further but instead are just making accusations of hatred, I have revoked your ability to edit this page for the duration of the block. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:16, 23 August 2012 (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.