User talk:141.157.200.57

December 2007[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Talk:Nursing home, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ~Sasha Callahan _(Talk) 07:32, 8 December 2007 (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.

ha ha ha ha ok but im right.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Funeral home, you will be blocked from editing. ~Sasha Callahan _(Talk) 07:36, 8 December 2007 (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 is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Weapon of mass destruction, you will be blocked from editing. ~Sasha Callahan _(Talk) 08:53, 8 December 2007 (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.

sure,make my day bitch.

Your recent edit(s) to Richard Karn were believed to be unconstructive, and so have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any further testing, and have a look at our welcome page if you wish to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Majorly (talk) 22:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022[edit]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months 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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I was block because? 141.157.200.57 (talk) 03:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The reason for the block is stated in the message above. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 16 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.

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 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).

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

Request reason:

What disruptive edits? All edits were made in good faith and were polite and civil. Perhaps certain users did not like that I brought up their documented history of working in concert to negatively edit Alt. Med. wikis? This was not meant to disrupt but rather show that certain frequent editors have been blocked in the past for such in concert edits and are now basically doing the same thing. I made no accusations, I only posted the relevant history in a new section of the related talk page and was blocked for bringing it up; I believe this was in error but if I am wrong for doing this fine. What is the protocol with this is the case and users have been blocked before for such actions? 141.157.200.57 (talk) 12:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Clear block evasion from 68.129.197.221. Remember, blocks apply to the person, not just the IP address and not just the account. I'll go revoke talk page access here to match the block over there. Yamla (talk) 12:36, 16 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.