90.243.120.95

February 2024

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 noticeboards.
• 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, as you did at Reversed Ze, you may be blocked from editing. Non-notable conlanguages are not relevant for including in an article. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2024 (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 stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Small capital B, you may be blocked from editing. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:02, 23 February 2024 (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 temporarily from editing for block evasion.

If you think 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 ~~~~}}.  Ad Orientem (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes but will u answer the questions I asked in the appeal? 90.243.120.95 (talk) 17:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

It would help if you read through the essays previously suggested to you about original research, notability, reliable sourcese, etc. and demonstrated an interest in following the community rules and expectations, including not trying to evade previously applied blocks. Regarding "Cyrilika," it's in the "constructed scripts and languages" section of Omniglot and would be effectively user generated content. "Zeshmiteng" appears only in an alphabet song YouTube video; there's no indication of notability. As has previously been explained to you, "in my opinion" does not meet the standards of evidence required for changes to a Wikipedia article. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

What about ur edits to Sekai’s Blog? This was a draft I made during my very early days of editing Wikipedia. And I didn’t think u would tamper with it. 90.243.120.95 (talk) 19:21, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Also the Hebrew Gimel appears twice in the article about yogh. And also in a part of the case in the article about the ampersand mathematical symbols like ⅋ are not letters bc they have no linguistic usage and it had no cases. 90.243.120.95 (talk) 19:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Seeing your contributions, it looks like you have seen my reply so why don’t u respond? 90.243.120.95 (talk) 19:43, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I didn't make them, but the reversion to your draft article were likely because you were trying to evade a block. Your edits to yogh and ampersand were more extensive than you're mentioning here. I've removed the second gimel from the article (thank you for pointing that out); the turned ampersand is not a letter, but the glyph is a descendent of &, which makes it appropriate to mention. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 19:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Just because I was using this I.P to evade my block doesn’t mean all my edits are disruptive. 90.243.120.95 (talk) 19:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Will u respond? 90.243.120.95 (talk) 20:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

This is going to be my last response. To put it simply, trying to evade a block is disruptive behavior and goes against community standards. Spend some time reading the suggested policies, guidelines, and essays. If you continue to think your edits and block-evasion aren't disruptive, then you aren't ready to contribute to the project. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 20:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

I was just polishing that draft and changing things that didn’t seem to be in the manual of style. 90.243.120.95 (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Will u respond? 90.243.120.95 (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2024 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

All my contributions were meant to be useful and they were probably not disruptive. And also this is not a conlang, this is a Slovak Cyrillic alphabet and also why did you revert my edits and protected my draft about Sekai’s Blog? (I created it and I was just polishing bits that weren’t encyclopaedic and stuff like that before writing more stuff related to it like adding more sources.) And also I show remorse for anything that is against the Wikipedia rules and how is the Czech Cyrillic alphabet and the Zeshmiteng language not notable? And also in my opinion (some but not all) IPA symbols are not letters bc they not have a upper case or a lowercase and Eth has nothing to do with G with breve and on Yogh the Hebrew Gimel was added twice and not to mention it included letters like C and G which are parent letters and not sisters. (U wouldn’t consider ur own mom to be ur sister would u?)90.243.120.95 (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 17:31, 24 February 2024 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

All my contributions were meant to be useful and they were probably not disruptive. If I did do anything wrong please explain.90.243.120.95 (talk) 20:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have been previously blocked on IP 90.243.79.125. That block is currently still in place. You may not edit the encyclopedia while an active block remains in effect. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC) Ad Orientem (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2024 (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.

• Courtesy ping @JBW. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

---