Season's Greetings |
Chris Keating (talk | contribs) →Blocked? I say {{unblock}} ...: new section |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[File:Xmas Ornament.jpg|110px|left|]] '''''To You and Yours!''''' |
[[File:Xmas Ornament.jpg|110px|left|]] '''''To You and Yours!''''' |
||
[[User:Bzuk|FWiW Bzuk]] ([[User talk:Bzuk|talk]]) 22:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC) {{clear}} |
[[User:Bzuk|FWiW Bzuk]] ([[User talk:Bzuk|talk]]) 22:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC) {{clear}} |
||
== Blocked? I say {{unblock}} ... == |
|||
"Editing from 1.136.96.0/23 has been blocked (disabled) by {{reply to|Prodego}} for the following reason(s): |
|||
Anonymous (unregistered) editing from IP addresses in this range has been blocked. In rare cases, usually in response to serious abuse, logged-in editing may also be blocked". |
|||
Nice... |
|||
I'm not a prolific editor by any means, but attempting to respond to another user's Christmas message and being told I'm blocked for vandalism pisses me off beyond my power to adequately express. |
|||
I've never committed vandalism; have reverted a few cases of it, in fact. I NEVER make edits when not logged in. I challenge anyone to show otherwise. |
|||
If vandalism has been occurring from an unlogged in account, why does Wikipedia not have the facility to block edits from that IP address, while still allowing edits from logged-in accounts? |
|||
[[User:Chris Keating|Chris Keating]] ([[User talk:Chris Keating#top|talk]]) 01:19, 24 December 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:19, 24 December 2015
Season's Greetings
To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
== Blocked? I say
Chris Keating (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Change
{{unblock}}
to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}
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.
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=original unblock reason |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=original unblock reason |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=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
... ==
"Editing from 1.136.96.0/23 has been blocked (disabled) by @Prodego: for the following reason(s): Anonymous (unregistered) editing from IP addresses in this range has been blocked. In rare cases, usually in response to serious abuse, logged-in editing may also be blocked".
Nice...
I'm not a prolific editor by any means, but attempting to respond to another user's Christmas message and being told I'm blocked for vandalism pisses me off beyond my power to adequately express.
I've never committed vandalism; have reverted a few cases of it, in fact. I NEVER make edits when not logged in. I challenge anyone to show otherwise.
If vandalism has been occurring from an unlogged in account, why does Wikipedia not have the facility to block edits from that IP address, while still allowing edits from logged-in accounts?
Chris Keating (talk) 01:19, 24 December 2015 (UTC)