User talk:173.13.132.244

December 2018

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Longhair\^talk 05:04, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

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 is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I restored text that had been part of an article for FOUR years, with sourced, accurate references. The editor Ewen Douglas needs to be investigated. As another editor has written, he has ruined that article and has started - and it seems won - several, multiple edit wars. Messages have been left for him, but he ignores them. Messages left on the talk page of the article, rather than engage, he accuses users of sock puppetry. The editor he was first engaged in an edit war with was in Malaysia according to their IP address, yet he accuses me of being the same editor. And nobody challenges him. He managed to get the article locked so that he could perform all his contentious edits. Not the article is unlocked, he has started warring again. There is nothing wrong with the edits I restored and they are ALL sourced. Blocking me and making threats is simply allowing a bully to stamp all over anyone who is trying to improve wikipedia. His accusations are as offensive as his behaviour and yet, anyone who challenges him is blocked from editing. A farce

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=I restored text that had been part of an article for FOUR years, with sourced, accurate references. The editor Ewen Douglas needs to be investigated. As another editor has written, he has ruined that article and has started - and it seems won - several, multiple edit wars. Messages have been left for him, but he ignores them. Messages left on the talk page of the article, rather than engage, he accuses users of sock puppetry. The editor he was first engaged in an edit war with was in Malaysia according to their IP address, yet he accuses me of being the same editor. And nobody challenges him. He managed to get the article locked so that he could perform all his contentious edits. Not the article is unlocked, he has started warring again. There is nothing wrong with the edits I restored and they are ALL sourced. Blocking me and making threats is simply allowing a bully to stamp all over anyone who is trying to improve wikipedia. His accusations are as offensive as his behaviour and yet, anyone who challenges him is blocked from editing. A farce |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=I restored text that had been part of an article for FOUR years, with sourced, accurate references. The editor Ewen Douglas needs to be investigated. As another editor has written, he has ruined that article and has started - and it seems won - several, multiple edit wars. Messages have been left for him, but he ignores them. Messages left on the talk page of the article, rather than engage, he accuses users of sock puppetry. The editor he was first engaged in an edit war with was in Malaysia according to their IP address, yet he accuses me of being the same editor. And nobody challenges him. He managed to get the article locked so that he could perform all his contentious edits. Not the article is unlocked, he has started warring again. There is nothing wrong with the edits I restored and they are ALL sourced. Blocking me and making threats is simply allowing a bully to stamp all over anyone who is trying to improve wikipedia. His accusations are as offensive as his behaviour and yet, anyone who challenges him is blocked from editing. A farce |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=I restored text that had been part of an article for FOUR years, with sourced, accurate references. The editor Ewen Douglas needs to be investigated. As another editor has written, he has ruined that article and has started - and it seems won - several, multiple edit wars. Messages have been left for him, but he ignores them. Messages left on the talk page of the article, rather than engage, he accuses users of sock puppetry. The editor he was first engaged in an edit war with was in Malaysia according to their IP address, yet he accuses me of being the same editor. And nobody challenges him. He managed to get the article locked so that he could perform all his contentious edits. Not the article is unlocked, he has started warring again. There is nothing wrong with the edits I restored and they are ALL sourced. Blocking me and making threats is simply allowing a bully to stamp all over anyone who is trying to improve wikipedia. His accusations are as offensive as his behaviour and yet, anyone who challenges him is blocked from editing. A farce |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

173.13.132.244 (talk) 05:11, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Ewen Douglas

The editor Ewen Douglas has been disruptively vandalising the article Prisoner (TV series). Whenever Ewen Douglas does not get his own way, he accuses editors of being sock puppets. If he sees an IP address, he accuses those editors of being the same person, even though they are on different continents. Ewen Douglas has ruined an article that existed perfectly well for many years and keeps removing sourced, referenced, accurate edits. Ewen Douglas has also engaged in "revenge editing" against editors, destroying other articles out of spite. This behaviour is not in line with wikipedia guidelines, and yet several administrators are supporting his actions. Wikipedia is simply now a place for bullying.173.13.132.244 (talk) 05:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)