Misplaced Pages

User talk:69.132.199.100

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Miranda (talk | contribs) at 07:06, 19 March 2007 (update statement). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 07:06, 19 March 2007 by Miranda (talk | contribs) (update statement)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


block by rogue admin, known sock puppet, was reverting vandilise he doing, he hop onto admin account. please

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

69.132.199.100 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Please provide a reason as to why you should be unblocked.
Change {{unblock}} to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}


Exceptions Since the rule is intended to prevent edit warring, reverts which are clearly not such will not breach the rule. Since edit warring is considered harmful, exceptions to the rule will be construed narrowly.

Since reverting in this context means undoing the actions of another editor or editors, reverting your own actions ("self-reverting") will not breach the rule.

Other exceptions to the rule include the following:


Reverting unsourced or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons (see Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons)


Next time be more careful 69.132.199.100 06:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

You violated the three revert rule. A fan site is not considered to be controversial, if the content of the site is not libellous. However, placing libellous statements on wikipedia is. Previous to the block, instead of performing page reverts, you should have discussed the fan site being deleted on the talk page. Real96 07:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

User infoThis 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.
Category: