User talk:94.29.3.116

June 2020

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Hillary Clinton email controversy, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You were warned at User talk:2A00:1370:812C:ADF2:BC21:B8EF:E68D:7B48. Look at the diff. Use the"Show changes" button to see what you are doing before saving your edit. David Biddulph (talk) 14:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Hillary Clinton email controversy 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Stop the edit warring. You are using multiple IPs to do this, which is forbidden. You must use only one account. -- Valjean (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

There were no edit war and you know it, the guy asked to add sources and then another source and then I made a mistake. Also, you cannot block me that is the beauty of using ip editing. That is why I use it, BTW, I could just use my Admin powers... But no, thanks, I do not play this games publically. Ah, yes. It is prohibited by rules to follow users around like you did... It is, BTW, also illegal in U.S. Code sense. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 00:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Needless to say I have a hard time believing you are an admin, unless you are an admin at the Dubai Wikipedia. A CU check should be performed. -- Valjean (talk) 16:10, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I am not going to state my account, no thanks. Russian. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 12:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 00:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 00:40, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

There was no edit war, I made mistake in duplicating part of the article and did not get it. Also I cannot control how my ips are changing between devices and operators, I cannot control it, this is also a lie that this is prohibited. And you know it. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 00:48, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

You should stick to one account, and, because your IPs are dynamic and constantly changing, you should create an account and only use it. Always log in. An account will also provide you more privacy and rights than you have now. -- Valjean (talk) 16:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I have an account, as I already mentioned. Again you must stop following me, that is against the rules to do so. I will also remind you that ip editing should be encouraged per Wikipedia:Welcome unregistered editing. What you are doing here is against the rules. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 12:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

No, I am not violating any rules. By your own admission (you "have an account"), you are violating the rules by using IPs to avoid responsibility. That is not allowed. -- Valjean (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:QAnon, you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2020 (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 fully state the rules I broke, otherwise remove the worning, you also are breaking Wikipedia:Welcome unregistered editing. Bless you heart. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 12:17, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM. Talkpages aren't for forum-style speculation or for airing your views on politics and current events - they are for specific, sourced suggestions for article improvement, not for commentary. Stick to specific, actionable sughgestions. Acroterion (talk) 12:21, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I suggested improvement. Looks like you are not removing it. Again, Wikipedia:Welcome unregistered editing. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

This [1] isn't a suggestion for improvement. Acroterion (talk) 12:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I can start RFC there if you want. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 12:31, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Then I don't think you're a new user if you know about RFCs, and no, you can't have RFCs on your opinions. If you have or had an account, log in and use it. Acroterion (talk) 12:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it is right. I will remind you again that "therefore, unregistered editing should be encouraged whether done by newcomers, or by even old hands wishing a return for renewal of the prime unregistered editor experience". I am not going to use my accounts because you are against russian people and targeting them trying to remove them from platform. 94.29.3.116 (talk) 12:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

You claim to be an admin and are deliberately not using your account. That's wrong on many levels. Coupled with your obviously NOTHERE history here, you should be blocked and your admin tools removed. You have used mostly Moscow IPS, but also Dubai IPs. -- Valjean (talk) 15:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

---