User talk:190.158.2.15 - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by J Greb (talk | contribs) at 21:45, 12 September 2014 (→Again: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:45, 12 September 2014 by J Greb (talk | contribs) (→Again: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Your changes on Toad (comics)

First off, you are not a registered user or administrator either. Secondly, it is inappropriate to address other users (anonymous or logged in) using language such as "fuck you" as you did here, per our civility policy. Thirdly, if you did not see the hidden note that you wrote over, this was added by previous editors and reads as follows: "Please do NOT add any information about Toad and X-Men Origins: Wolverine; unless a citation is provided there is no proof that the long-tongued mutant in the movie is indeed Toad, as he was NOT credited. Unless you can provide a citation, please do NOT add anything." While you did add citations to cite your claims, I checked those citations and they are either not from reliable sources, or they make no claims about Toad at all. Would you be willing to provide a civilly-worded counter argument to this? 68.57.233.34 (talk) 23:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for a week

You are not adding material based on valid sources. And you appear to have no interest in avoiding invalid sources.
There is enough in you edits, tone, and attitude to support that you are an indefinitely blocked editor evading that block.

Normally I'd say take the week off, read the policies on this edition of Misplaced Pages and try to understand what is acceptable here, and then come back an work within those limits. However, coming back to this IP will get it blocked for a longer duration. Coming back with another IP or a new sockpuppet will just result in those being blocked as well. You are evading a block for willfully damaging articles by not working within the guide lines and being unable to play nicely with others. You show no signs of having changed or even being willing to try and change. Please stop.

- J Greb (talk) 15:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

If I think or edit different from you that does not make me be the such 'Krlzh'. The problem is that you are bad or sick head or God knows if he or she hurt you because it shows that you hate it so much to look at, blocking me on simple suspicion and not with tangible evidence. Why ask for my unblock, the only thing that is 'Krlzh' is because of you and that user was blocked the article by Joe Chill here in Misplaced Pages and not accept references that I leave in the biography of Bob Kane. --190.158.2.15 (talk) 22:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

no valid and coherent reason given to unblock. Attacking the blocking admin does not improve your argument.--Anthony Bradbury 22:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

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.

Sources again.

Same aversion to reliable sources here. Since CBM's piece is attributed to a handle it is more Blog than reliable. And then there is Mania sourcing to an anonymous email, not the most credible thing to source to.

Please don't try again. Get a clue as to what is a reliable source before adding more dubious content.

- J Greb (talk) 21:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

If it weren't for the fact that this is a badly hidden attack on another editor, it would be funny.

You are doing exactly what got you blocked before, and it's gotten this IP another month off. Please stop.

- J Greb (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

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

Request reason:

I have not been a bad editor, much less have broken the rules of wikipedia. So I don't understand what's the problem with this administrator J Greb? put a block is exaggerated, the point is that just leave me alone and unblock me, attack another user is tell him leave me alone because I feel harassed and seeing that he has problems with the sources of an article? Unblock me please

Decline reason:

You agreed to rules on this private website, yet it appears to continue to break the same rule. The purpose of the first block was to prevent it from happening again - unfortunately, that purpose was not successful and you find yourself blocked again for the same thing. the panda ₯’ 23:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Again

Source what you add. It would also help if to proof read it to get the English right. This is an example of doing neither.

- J Greb (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

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.