User talk:204.128.182.15

November 2020

Hello, I'm 4thfile4thrank. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Homestead Acts 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 Teahouse. Thanks. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 00:37, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

November 2021

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Mordechai Dovid Unger, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 05:36, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, I'm Khrincan. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Avigdor Miller 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Khrincan (talk) 17:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

May 2023

Hi 204.128.182.15! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Psalms several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Psalms, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 20:58, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

November 2023

Hello, I'm Philipnelson99. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Wikipedia:List of controversial issues—because it 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 20:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not being reasonable in your edits.

I would like to show Elon Musk how woke you are in the edits and mafia style ownership over content on wikipedia. feel free to talk back with me and we can reach an mutual understanding 204.128.182.15 (talk) 04:27, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

Request reason:

I added cultural context to a page. Due to a user being biased and disliking my views, they kept on undoing my edits even when i explained each time what I was doing and I modified the citations to meet the removers criteria. I just be allowed back on and the other user must be suspended 204.128.182.15 (talk) 04:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See WP:NOTTHEM, your unblock request should only discuss your actions. You shouldn't be making edits related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at all; it is a designated contentious topic where editing is not permitted for non-logged in users or non-extended confirmed users. Your sourcing was poor and you edit warred to preserve your edit. There is no reason here to remove the block. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I appeal my account suspension. I followed all rules and used high quality citation, especially in relationship the rest of the article. my edit made sure not to include any subjective or adjectives in describing people, rather just facts needed for the context. I request a reply from the user that blocked me citing specifically what rules in went against and explain how I went against them. what i ask for is reasonable and i look forwards to your response 204.128.182.15 (talk) 06:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are confused. This is an IP block, no account appears to be involved. Or at least, you haven't specified any specific account. This also isn't the place to demand a response from a specific user. Finally, you claim you were following all the rules but were clearly editing in a contentious topic where editing is not permitted. Yamla (talk) 11:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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.