4.34.50.170

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 4.34.50.170, has made edits to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources that do not conform to our policies and therefore have been reverted. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles. If you did not do this, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:

• Help contents – the main help page.
• Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask the Help Desk, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! — Newslinger talk 08:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

February 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

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 your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 01:55, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

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.

Your recent editing history at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - MrX 🖋 02:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

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.

Rebuttal

This is wildly and laughably false. I cited numerous sources outlining a US court decision proving my position. I merely labeled it NC. You CANNOT say there's consensus when a US court has objectively rejected such a position.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:MrX (Result: ). Thank you. - MrX 🖋 02:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: ). Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:Malik Shabazz (Result: ). Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

February 2019

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 03:36, 22 February 2019 (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 is wildly and laughably false. I cited numerous sources outlining a US court decision proving my position. I merely labeled it NC. You CANNOT say there's consensus when a US court has objectively rejected such a position.

• Don't be stupid. If you had posted something on some talk page to discuss the status of some source, maybe. But you're just going into some list that archives decisions reached by consensus, and changing them. So yeah, I can say there's consensus blah blah blah because there WAS consensus. The moment you find me a judge who had ruled that that particular entry in a list of sources on some private website is invalid, I'll relent. In the meantime, spare us the politically motivated bullshit. Drmies (talk) 03:48, 22 February 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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'm not being stupid. I cited multiple sources, including SPLC themselves showing they paid over $3m for defamation. I marked it as NC because I'm saying there is NOT consensus of their reliability. Quite the opposite... there's literally a court ruling showing they lied publicly about someone and caused $3m in damages with that lie alone. There are many more defamation lawsuits pending against the SPLC. You cannot say there's consensus that they're reliable. There's literally a court order saying they're not. 4.34.50.170 (talk) 13:34, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As above. Furthermore, you made a legal threat in your post which is enough reason to keep you blocked per WP:NLT until you explicitly withdraw it. 331dot (talk) 13:54, 22 February 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.

Talkback

Hello, 4.34.50.170. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources.
Message added 08:38, 24 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Newslinger talk 08:38, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, 4.34.50.170. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources.
Message added 09:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Newslinger talk 09:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

February 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 09:22, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as done at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources.

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 ~~~~}}.  — JJMC89 (T·C) 09:24, 24 February 2019 (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.

---