Open main menu

Contents

Welcome!Edit

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 5.44.170.9, has made edits to Liberty Statue (Budapest) 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:

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! Nigos (t@lk Contribs) 12:11, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Sorry about that. Your edit wasn't clear. Thanks! Nigos (t@lk Contribs) 12:16, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019Edit

  Hello, I'm TheDoDahMan. Your recent edit(s) to the page 5G appears to have added incorrect information, so it has been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. Thank you. TheDoDahMan (talk) 16:46, 31 May 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.

June 2019Edit

  Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Rare-earth element, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. andritolion (talk) 06:18, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archivedEdit

 

Hi 5.44.170.9! You created a thread called Found two nearly identical articles on major topic at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)


June 2019Edit

  Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at 2019 Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protests, you may be blocked from editing. Wefk423 (talk) 17:07, 12 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.

  Please do not add or change content, as you did at 2019 Gulf of Oman attack, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. StudiesWorld (talk) 13:59, 13 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.

3RR WarningEdit

Your recent editing history at Șor Party 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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. Woody (talk) 11:53, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Apidima CaveEdit

 On 14 July 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Apidima Cave, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

SpencerT•C 23:14, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

ITN/CEdit

Please don't re-open it like that. If you would like to contest it, please ask User:Tone on their talk page. Thank you. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

WhackEdit

 

August 2019Edit

  Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Altai Republic 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. CLCStudent (talk) 17:03, 15 August 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.
Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for block evasion.
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 ~~~~}}.  Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:20, 23 August 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 blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed:

5.44.170.9 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Your reason here That's some exceptional bureaucracy here. I am not evading any bans as I've never been blocked before. Can someone properly explain to me why was I banned? I assume that, as I've predicted, the reason was that I dared to disagree with the PC crowd [here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&diff=prev&oldid=911202788], correct?

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.

Return to the user page of "5.44.170.9".