Jump to content

User talk:46.63.38.5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 46.63.38.5 (talk) at 15:17, 21 November 2020 (→November 2020). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello, 46.63.38.5, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! 65.94.171.126 (talk) 05:01, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous
Teahouse logo
Hello! 46.63.38.5, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us!

Welcome!

Hello, 46.63.38.5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

April 2014

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48h for harassment. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

WP:DUCK, similar to other recent Ukrainian vandals quickly starting harassing editors in good standing.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

„Same Ukraininan vandal” — same to who? Russian nazi, stop drinking vodka! 46.63.38.5 (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's really not helping your case. Kuru (talk) 14:01, 11 April 2015 (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.

April 2015

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Khmelnytskyi, Ukraine. NeilN talk to me 19:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 60h for WP:3RR. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

--Ymblanter (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Russian nazis try to push their divorced from the reality own original research, ignoring and destroying proofs submitted on talk pages and blocking users under false formal reasons, thus creating the illusion of their own majority. I think these things are unacceptable to the encyclopedia, which calls itself free. 46.63.38.5 (talk) 19:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. PhilKnight (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2015 (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.

Kiev

As I said, a Ukrainian school will tend to utilize Ukrainian spelling norms. Thus, the spelling utilized by the Ukrainian institute is irrelevant to usage in primarily English sources. As for the Kyiv Post, that spelling is most common for that newspaper. English language sources will use "Kyiv Post" (and other terms such as "Dynamo Kyiv") even when they generally use "Kiev" for the actual city. Yes, this is inconsistent. A lot of things in the English language aren't really consistent. This isn't something that is any business of Ukrainians. Do not tell us what words to use in English and we will not tell you what words to use in Ukrainian. I am beginning to get tired of repeating myself. I think that the next time you try to tell us how "wrong" the English language is for using "Kyiv", I will just start pointing out all the incorrect grammar and awkward phrasings in your posts to show that you have no basis on which to present yourself as an expert on "correct" English. --Khajidha (talk) 19:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, tell me what words to use in Ukrainian. I don't say that I'm an expert on English, but you tries to ignore all facts and continue supporting original research. And yes, I don't mind to be pointed out my mistakes. Also, welcome to Kyiv! http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Kyiv_Boryspil_Terminal_F.jpg 46.63.38.5 (talk) 20:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not ignoring facts, simply pointing out that the facts you mention are irrelevant to the policy. Policy is to use the common English name as used in the general corpus of reliable sources. That name happens to be Kiev, as is evidenced by the nearly universal use of that spelling by English language newspapers and television shows when reporting on the Euromaidan and Crimea stories of the past few years. As for your photo, I fail to see what relevance it has. That is the terminal in Ukraine, of course it is dominated by Ukrainian usage. A better test would be how the name is spelled in announcements at Heathrow or Washington Dulles..--Khajidha (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The common usage of mistake doesn't correct that mistake, also you haven't proven the common usage except using some excuses. I like how you find Ukrainian influence everywhere in all the world. This is very similar to the Russians, which in all their troubles they find Yarosh business card. To complete the picture, I'll give few additional examples of Ukrainian masonic world conspiracy about Kyiv name from main European newspapers: http://www.dw.de/kyiv-forces-withdraw-from-donetsk-airport/a-18208438, http://www.euronews.com/2015/01/18/kyiv-claims-victory-in-new-battle-for-control-of-donetsk-airport/ and American http://www.voanews.com/content/european-union-ukraine-summit-april/2698313.html. Also don't forget to rename this article about international airport http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyiv_International_Airport_%28Zhuliany%29 because Kyiv is an irrelevant name for your opinion. 46.63.38.5 (talk) 04:50, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Google searches: Kiev, ~137,000,000; Kyiv, ~23,100,000. Specifically Google news searches: Kiev, ~3,080,000; Kyiv, ~534,000 (several of the results on the first page are either from "Kyiv Post" or about "Dynamo Kyiv" and thus don't show general English usage for the city). ngram: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Kiev%2CKyiv&year_start=1990&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CKiev%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CKyiv%3B%2Cc0 Show me major American, British, Canadian, or Australian news reports talking about events in Kyiv. Not English as a second language press from elsewhere, but native English usage. --Khajidha (talk) 12:00, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So where is your Kiev now? 46.63.38.5 (talk) 14:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Hello, I'm PlyrStar93. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Pale Moon (web browser), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. -★- PlyrStar93. →Message me. ← 23:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring, inserting of poorly sourced content--Ymblanter (talk) 06:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.[reply]
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 ~~~~}}.


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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, this is not poorly sourced content and I didn't violate Wikipedia policy. WP:PRIMARY allows me to use primary souces to make descriptive statements of facts: A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. Everyone can verify this statement by yourself, just by installing New Moon on Windows XP-based computer (or virtual machine). Please cancel this block and approve my changes to Pale_Moon_(web_browser) article. 46.63.38.5 (talk) 10:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The block is for edit warring. The content is largely irrelevant; this is a block based on your behaviour. Since you show no indication that you have recognised this or that you intend to address it, I am declining this appeal.. Yunshui 雲水 10:57, 3 October 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

If the content is largely irrelevant for blocking and as I say it was allowed by Wikipedia policy, please approve it in the article about Pale_Moon_(web_browser).

Decline reason:

This is not an unblock request. Yamla (talk) 16:47, 6 October 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Ok, please approve my changes in the article about Pale_Moon_(web_browser) and unblock me.

Decline reason:

Talk page access revoked for duration of block, as you have had three attempts now and have still shown no understanding of the reason for the block and have given no indication that you will do anything about it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:13, 6 October 2017 (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.

I reblocked for a month for block evasion.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Russian go home and drink vodka. 46.63.38.5 (talk) 18:24, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
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 ~~~~}}.
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).

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

Request reason:

Please change my block period to forever so that I will not waste my time to this shit accidentally in the future. Thank you! 46.63.38.5 (talk) 22:11, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I read this comment as indicating that you do not intend to edit in the future so this appeal is closed as moot. Just Chilling (talk) 22:42, 10 November 2017 (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.

November 2020

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 years for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}.  ~~~~
Zero learning curve.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Just admit that you're like to claim users and people as "propagandists" but don't like it when someone can prove that you're really a propagandist. Anyway, you can't ban all the Internet, it can be easier just admit it. 46.63.38.5 (talk) 15:17, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:46.63.38.5&oldid=989878316"