Misplaced Pages

User talk:96.11.189.125: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:51, 27 February 2009 editZagalejo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers86,258 editsm typo← Previous edit Revision as of 21:09, 27 February 2009 edit undoJayron32 (talk | contribs)105,509 edits decline.,Next edit →
Line 3: Line 3:




{{unblock|He has not verified any facts. I HAVE THE MAGAZINE!!! You can't find the magazine online because like most magazines, they are not printed online. For some reason, he is just singling me out and I am getting very frustrated at that. Whoever else added that he ate meatballs for every point, I dont know what to say about that, for that was not me. But I feel I was unfairly blocked.}} {{unblock reviewed|1=He has not verified any facts. I HAVE THE MAGAZINE!!! You can't find the magazine online because like most magazines, they are not printed online. For some reason, he is just singling me out and I am getting very frustrated at that. Whoever else added that he ate meatballs for every point, I dont know what to say about that, for that was not me. But I feel I was unfairly blocked.|decline=All of this may be true (and I do not confirm that it is, I only concede the point for sake of arguement), however none of that gives you the right to ]. You clearly were attempting to force others to accept your version of the article by repeatedly putting it back. Your addition has been challenged, and merely being a true thing does not mean that it is always relevent to the article in question. Regardless, you have not given any indication that you intend to discuss your edits and build consensus before re-inserting them, so I see no reason to unblock you. ].].] 21:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)}}
:The Harold Washington Library in Chicago has every copy of ''GQ'' since 1983. . I looked up the May 2002 issue there, and didn't see anything to verify your claims. (And for the record, I can also access abstracts of ''GQ'' articles from ]. I found nothing to verify your claims there, either. ]''']''' 20:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC) :The Harold Washington Library in Chicago has every copy of ''GQ'' since 1983. . I looked up the May 2002 issue there, and didn't see anything to verify your claims. (And for the record, I can also access abstracts of ''GQ'' articles from ]. I found nothing to verify your claims there, either. ]''']''' 20:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:09, 27 February 2009

Vitaly Potapenko

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Vitaly Potapenko. If you vandalize Misplaced Pages again, you will be blocked from editing. Zagalejo^^^ 18:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


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).

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

Request reason:

He has not verified any facts. I HAVE THE MAGAZINE!!! You can't find the magazine online because like most magazines, they are not printed online. For some reason, he is just singling me out and I am getting very frustrated at that. Whoever else added that he ate meatballs for every point, I dont know what to say about that, for that was not me. But I feel I was unfairly blocked.

Decline reason:

All of this may be true (and I do not confirm that it is, I only concede the point for sake of arguement), however none of that gives you the right to edit war. You clearly were attempting to force others to accept your version of the article by repeatedly putting it back. Your addition has been challenged, and merely being a true thing does not mean that it is always relevent to the article in question. Regardless, you have not given any indication that you intend to discuss your edits and build consensus before re-inserting them, so I see no reason to unblock you. Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:09, 27 February 2009 (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.

The Harold Washington Library in Chicago has every copy of GQ since 1983. . I looked up the May 2002 issue there, and didn't see anything to verify your claims. (And for the record, I can also access abstracts of GQ articles from ProQuest. I found nothing to verify your claims there, either. Zagalejo^^^ 20:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)