Jump to content

User talk:126.209.12.35: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
block warnings: talkpage censure*/ concerted circumvention of oversight
/* Hasty
Line 24: Line 24:


Not hasty, not at all dubious; those are concerted efforts at circumventing the established OVERSIGHT protocols, seeking to SUPPRESS without wikisanction. And those efforts have been somewhat successful, in explicit contradiction with the Raison D'être of wikipedia. Hence, not only talkpages have been wantonly redacted, but the cybercrime article was locked and the cybercrime countermeasures article has been locked. Particularly, references to DNS records, timing (and dates), value-dates, and other '''fact'''ual reference are being termed conspiratorial. Co?[[Special:Contributions/126.209.0.225|126.209.0.225]] ([[User talk:126.209.0.225|talk]]) 22:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Not hasty, not at all dubious; those are concerted efforts at circumventing the established OVERSIGHT protocols, seeking to SUPPRESS without wikisanction. And those efforts have been somewhat successful, in explicit contradiction with the Raison D'être of wikipedia. Hence, not only talkpages have been wantonly redacted, but the cybercrime article was locked and the cybercrime countermeasures article has been locked. Particularly, references to DNS records, timing (and dates), value-dates, and other '''fact'''ual reference are being termed conspiratorial. Co?[[Special:Contributions/126.209.0.225|126.209.0.225]] ([[User talk:126.209.0.225|talk]]) 22:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
bang out of order. grossly apologetic for the emotionally-charged outburst spurred by a behind-the-scenes concerted effort.^^^^

Revision as of 22:37, 20 October 2017

October 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Muhandes. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Noida, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Muhandes (talk) 22:38, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello. Your recent edit to Anuj appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 12:55, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Noida, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Muhandes (talk) 16:54, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Every single edit you made is unsourced. Even the one claiming it "adds sources" doesn't. Please stop this. --Muhandes (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Sony Pictures hack. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Everymorning (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Stalking. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. David J Johnson (talk) 12:57, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Zero Hour. Serols (talk) 16:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hasty (and possibly dubious) block warnings

Several of the above actions are based on insufficient impetus, or are dubious. I believe that "Zero Hour" may refer to UP TO one minute after midnight, but not thereafter. 126.209.12.35 (talk) 17:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not hasty, not at all dubious; those are concerted efforts at circumventing the established OVERSIGHT protocols, seeking to SUPPRESS without wikisanction. And those efforts have been somewhat successful, in explicit contradiction with the Raison D'être of wikipedia. Hence, not only talkpages have been wantonly redacted, but the cybercrime article was locked and the cybercrime countermeasures article has been locked. Particularly, references to DNS records, timing (and dates), value-dates, and other factual reference are being termed conspiratorial. Co?126.209.0.225 (talk) 22:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC) bang out of order. grossly apologetic for the emotionally-charged outburst spurred by a behind-the-scenes concerted effort.^^^^[reply]