User talk:2402:3A80:871:D2C3:C7EE:162F:B744:EF9E

April 2019

Hello, I'm Fylindfotberserk. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Giriraj Singh 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 help desk. Thanks. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:42, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

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.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Giriraj Singh. 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. Why are you deleting sub sections? They might be helpful in the future for expansion Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:50, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

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.

@NJA: I think you are a bit late with block because I was not alone edit warring and the issue has been resolved per talk page. 2402:3A80:871:D2C3:C7EE:162F:B744:EF9E (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

I would disagree I was “late” as there was active disruptive editing occurring. The alternative to your block is to lock the page down from any edits (protection). If that’s what is needed after you’ve had some time to cool off and engaging in discussion with the other editor on the article talk page fails then do ask for page protection until the dispute is resolved. I have cautioned the user on their talk page as well. NJA (t/c) 14:39, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

@NJA: But this edit was the indication that the dispute has been resolved now. Your block came 11 minutes later. I agree that page protection would be alternative but that is no longer the right option as I am not going to edit war and I don't expect other editor to edit war as well. Would you consider unblocking now since the dispute has been resolved and block is now punitive? Thanks 2402:3A80:871:D2C3:C7EE:162F:B744:EF9E (talk) 14:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

At this time I will leave the block in place due to disruptive editing and edit warring, but I shall reduce the period to 24 hours. I do not plan to revisit this again and if you believe it is still unfair you may request a block review for another admin after reading the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.   NJA (t/c) 14:51, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

2402:3A80:871:D2C3:C7EE:162F:B744:EF9E (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Dispute in question was already resolved per this edit before I got blocked by @NJA: but again the dispute in question has been already resolved.[1] I know that I got blocked for edit warring and I promise not to edit war any further and use talk page to resolve dispute instead of edit warring. 2402:3A80:871:D2C3:C7EE:162F:B744:EF9E (talk) 14:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Procedural accept; this block has expired. Yamla (talk) 15:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

---