User talk:216.81.94.68

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello 216.81.94.68!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. If you edit without a username, your IP address (216.81.94.68) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started.

Happy editing! - wolf 23:35, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

Conflict of Interest[edit]

Information icon Hello, 216.81.81.80. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.
⚠️Note: please ensure you are familiar with this guideline before you edit any articles about the United States government or any U.S. federal agencies. Thank you - wolf 23:35, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This shared IP address has received multiple warnings for inappropriate edits. Since different users may be using this IP address, many of these warnings may be stale. Click [show] at far right to see all previous warnings and/or blocks.
The following is a record of previous warnings and/or blocks left for this IP. Please do not modify it.

July 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Raw milk do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

--Ronz (talk) 15:47, 9 July 2010 (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.

October 2010[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Uzair. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. M D Potter. Any comments? 20:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Cat Stevens. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The sources do not specify which immigration statute was being invoked; this is therefore original research and not allowed, even if it is accurate. That kind of detail, anyway, is not particularly helpful as it is unexplained. Tvoz/talk 06:30, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Penn State Nittany Lions football, you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 19:13, 14 November 2011 (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 your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Penn State Nittany Lions football. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 31 hours[edit]

To edit, please log in.

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.

A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Pro Wrestling Illustrated awards. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Papacha (talk) 03:12, 11 July 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.

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to WinShape Foundation appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you. Belchfire (talk) 11:29, 25 July 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.

Blocked for 48 hours[edit]

To edit, please log in.

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled. Registered users, however, are still able to edit. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, you may use this form to request a username. Alternatively, you may submit an appeal to the Unblock Ticket Request System and request that this IP address be unblocked. Either way, use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of either form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Unblock request #1[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Why was I blocked? I have been posting in TALK while others have not. I posted verfiable referances, others have not. When I asked for others for support of referances for their changes, they provided none. I reached out to a Admin to lock Winshape till I could post in the Dispute resolution noticeboard. I also posted in the Dispute resolution noticeboard while others have not. I have been following Wikipedia rules yet I am blocked?

Decline reason:

I have blocked you and refuse to lift my block because you have continued to be uncivil, assume bad faith in others, and, last but nowhere near least, have been edit warring on WinShape Foundation for over a week, claiming there is a consensus in your favor when none such exists. You have been able to convince not one editor on the discussion page and have driven other good faith contributors away. I am leaving this block in place but welcome any fellow administrator to review my actions and the grounds on which it has been based. I have had no personal involvement with the article beyond receiving a notice from an involved contributor that I should review the behavioral situation as an impartial third party. Best, Blurpeace 13:01, 25 July 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.

Just for the record, while I'm not entirely pleased with Blurpeace's block, I was also probably going to block your account for edit warring at Chick-Fil-A (including a 3RR violation which I gracefully ignored) and WinShape both. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 13:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request #2[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

How was I edit waring but others not? Many of them were making changes, all I did was revert back to what it was before (which is based on referances, not POV). I even posted in TALK, many of them did not. I reached out to have other page blocked till more work in TALK or Board could be made, others did not. I even posted at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Chickfila.2C_Winshape to bring this up, yet I am the ONLY one blocked??? 216.81.94.68 (talk) 13:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

"How was I edit waring but others not?" you ask. Well, as you noted, it was only you on your side and several on the other side, all of whom were reverting because your changes lacked consensus, which is supported by multiple editors reverting. Plus you basically admitted you were going to do it your way despite an ongoing discussion of the issue. You, basically, were editing disruptively and tendentiously. — Daniel Case (talk) 15:03, 25 July 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.

Unblock request #3[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

What? Now you are just making stuff up. Look at the reverts and TALK page there were others who did not agree to change it from what the referances said. Also I never said I was "going to do it" my way in fact this is what i said in your link "I ahve reverted the last edits. All the referances state Anti-gay. Chaning to anything else, esp not in the referances is NPOV." please show me where I said anything close to your claims? In fact I was the only one in TALK, those changing it were not in this case. Also maybe you forgot but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_democracy so having "several on the other side" does not make a consensus. So is this what Wikipedia has come to? Ignoring Wikipedia standards and rules and also having Admins makes claims that are not there, some may even say lie. AGAIN How was I edit waring but others not? Many of them were making changes, all I did was revert back to what it was before (which is based on referances, not POV). I even posted in TALK, many of them did not. I reached out to have other page blocked till more work in TALK or Board could be made, others did not. I even posted at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Chickfila.2C_Winshape to bring this up, yet I am the ONLY one blocked??? 216.81.81.85 (talk) 16:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I can see that there is a good case for the changes you wish to make. However, instead of putting that case forward and being willing to answer other people's views in a civil and collaborative way, you expressed yourself aggressively, contemptuously dismissing other editors' attempts at constructive discussion. You now make unblock requests here in which you attack other editors. Wikipedia works by collaboration and cooperation, not by editors taking a battleground approach. Since your unblock requests are unconstructive, your talk page access will be removed for the remainder of the block, to avoid further waste of everybody's time. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:08, 26 July 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.

Block increased to 72 hours[edit]

Since you have been evading this block by using other IP addresses, the block length has been increased. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fine illustration of how pointless and stupid blocking is. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 02:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012[edit]

Hello, I'm Torreslfchero. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions to Baitur Rehman, Silver Spring because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Torreslfchero (talk) 20:53, 23 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.

January 2013[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Awards and decorations of the United States military. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. S. Rich (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2013 (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.

January 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Mark Arsten. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:53, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014[edit]

Stop icon This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Chris Johnson (running back), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 17:59, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

April 2015[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm TYelliot. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to List of federal agencies in the United States— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 22:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm Doniago. I wanted to let you know that I undid your recent edits to the Leviathan (1989 film) plot summary because they added a significant amount of unneeded detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- DonIago (talk) 18:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm IronGargoyle. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Talk:Pattie Boyd  with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. IronGargoyle (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm NottNott. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Pyrus calleryana— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. -NottNott|talk Notify with {{re}} 16:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Faithful Word Baptist Church. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. RA0808 talkcontribs 17:17, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

July 2016[edit]

Stop icon This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at Shepard Smith, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - MrX 19:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2016[edit]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Milli Vanilli, 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. DonIago (talk) 16:58, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2018[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Red tide. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. LynxTufts (talk) 15:19, 8 November 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.

December 2018[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sarah Rose Summers. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Jebcubed (talk) 14:16, 14 December 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.

December 2019[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Tongo Tongo ambush. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Woodlot (talk) 13:29, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Horizontal segmentation (October 20)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:
The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Horizontal market. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, 216.81.94.68! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 13:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Horizontal segmentation[edit]

Information icon Hello, 216.81.94.68. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Horizontal segmentation, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Arjayay. Your recent edit(s) to the page Huma Abedin appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


September 2022[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Deltaspace42. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Palestinian Authority passport have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Deltaspace42 (talk) 19:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

October 2022[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to United States Marshals Service, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. - wolf 23:36, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:216.81.94.68&oldid=1141658026"