User talk:194.65.37.72

December 2017

Hello, I'm Flyer22 Reborn. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to General Logistics Systems— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:34, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

March 2018

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Richard Avedon. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 16:38, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

June 2019

Hello, I'm Ubiquity. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to John de Cobham, 2nd Baron Cobham 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 help desk. Thanks. ubiquity (talk) 20:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

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.

Blocking

I was blocked for no reason other than suspitions, as if the edite weren't better for the articles than their revertion, and as if there was any proof that the edite I've reatores were made by the account that isn't uses for over ten years! What clown business and travesti is this? This so-called "Administrator" is nothing but an irresponsible, a coward, a retard and a paranoid, he should be contained rather than left lose! He's after anyone who reverter his deletions of someone else who restored the edits of someone else whom he alone claims to be a long gone account user! 194.65.37.72 (talk) 17:03, 20 June 2019 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Blocking without reason. The text above. 194.65.37.72 (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

"made by the account that isn't uses for over ten years" That blocked editor has been editing this year and apparently, from this IP address. It's completely irrelevant that the account hasn't edited in ten years, given the massive block evasion. Yamla (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2019 (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.

I have revoked your talk page access for the duration of your block. Your personal attacks were in violation of WP:NPA and have no place here. --Yamla (talk) 17:20, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

November 2022

Hello, I'm Lol1VNIO. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Sean Parker—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. ~~ lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 16:03, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

---