User talk:208.58.72.94

November 2015[edit]

Hello, I'm Qed237. I noticed that you recently removed some content from FC Bayern Munich without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I have restored the removed content. 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. Thanks. Qed237 (talk) 23:48, 21 November 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.

This is total misinformation. NONE of these guys play for the first team. There are countless articles from respectable sources that show that they are demoted or don't play via professional contract. The footnotes explain them entirely. But it seems that a noble wiki editor who isn't amongst the clan can't get his message heard. This is insane. Patnovic was recalled for ONE game. He holds no professional contract. Benko. Same thing. Gaudino, Green, Lucic, Kirschoff all demoted. Its insane that you rather discus wiki privilege over accurate information.

Please stop wasting a good citizen's time in favour of policy over accurate information. I'm not going away.

And for the record, I explained why the last time. Some (xpletive Gorlitz) vetoed my totally legit sources for no reason other than arrogance. That's not what wiki is about. I'm humiliated. I explained and he didn't even respond to my posting why. That's unjust and misinformation. Terrible.

I am sorry if you think I am wasting your time but wikipedia relies on sources and there are sources saying that those players belong to the team. For example Green is listed in the official squad on Bayern Munich own webpage. Qed237 (talk) 00:09, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can always discuss this at the article talkpage, which is the location User:Walter Görlitz moved your message to as that is the proper location for this discussion. Qed237 (talk) 00:12, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. As a longtime user, I often forget that anonymous editors can't see when things are done to their edits and new editors may not know to look at the edit history of pages. Thanks for reminding me. Yes, the comments you left on my talk page were moved to the article's talk page. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:19, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking legitimate FROM THE FUNKING SOURCE information and blocking further edits. You're such a knowledgeable gentleman. I wish only the best for you.

Talkback[edit]

Hello, 208.58.72.94. You have new messages at Talk:FC Bayern Munich.
Message added 00:20, 22 November 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:20, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trying my best to abide. The dude abides...

http://www.abendzeitung-muenchen.de/inhalt.fc-bayern-greift-durch-youngster-trio-muss-wieder-zu-den-amateuren.f2dc8bb1-7766-41f0-8bcc-7d05aa732fa6.html

http://www.abendzeitung-muenchen.de/inhalt.bayern-spieler-aussortiert-guardiola-schickt-kirchhoff-in-die-regionalliga.23a647d7-71bb-4307-bd80-dbc5ef760969.html

And Benko...He was NEVER in the mix!!!!

I apologize for not being wiki savvy... Just trying to keep an accurate record accurate. I posted the original footnote of 148 or whatever, but it seems be bu run buckshot over misinformation. So what's my protocol??? I'm not a super stud reviewer or whatever you call your kids... Just trying to help the general public.

November 2015[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at FC Bayern Munich. Your edits have been or will be reverted or removed.

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. 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.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Qed237 (talk) 23:19, 25 November 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.

Scary!!!! But Halloween was over a fortnight past... You happy with your career? Love being king of the playground?

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at FC Bayern Munich. Qed237 (talk) 12:36, 26 November 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.

If you cannot find another way to express yourself than the blatant attack you posted at Talk:Douche, you will be blocked without further warning.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:21, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I greatly appreciate the love and warmth from Ponyo. Thank you for the threat. I'm fed up with repeatedly posting legitimate information, sourcing it and changing it only to be "undo". Is there any way (Please help me) from countering these people who only want to vandalize my legitmate edits. I'm at a breaking point. This is so unfair, unjust and such a waste of everyone's time - most notably the people who have to review my edits. I'm certain they can terrorize someone else to feel good about themselves.

As you continue to use this page to attack others I've revoked your talk page access. If you choose to appeal you can do so via WP:UTRS. To answer your question, when you find yourself in a content dispute you should avail yourself of the dispute resolution methods noted here.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:10, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks[edit]

Blocks can only be handed out by administrators, but anyone can report to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism if there is clear vandalism. May I suggest you read WP:VANDALISM. If you have other things you want to tell administrators there is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. However, I can not see that I have done anything wrong as you keep on removing sourced content without WP:CONSENSUS on the article talkpage and low level notifications has not helped, you just keep on doing the same thing. The warnings given are standard warnings and not personal attacks and I am sorry if you feel that way. Qed237 (talk) 13:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will reach out to an administrator. Happy Thanksgiving!

November 2015[edit]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent vandalism. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:23, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

December 2015[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistent vandalism. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Spencer^T♦C 06:35, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism? Please explain. And this should be rich.

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).

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

Request reason:

I post a legitmate source - actually the horse's mouth in this instance - and I'm blocked for vandalism???? I think that Spencer needs to be blocked for his actions - for life. And Qed237 as well for undoing my edits

Decline reason:

Demanding that other people be blocked is really a very poor way of trying to get yourself unblocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:05, 5 December 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.

{unblock|reason=Seriously, that's your rationale??? You're a genius. Advice: don't ever become a lawyer. That's free advice. Would any intelligent administrator like to weigh in about the legitmate posting I made???}}

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).

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

Request reason:

And for the record, there was no "demanding" as you so eloquently profess. It was merely a suggestion. Again, not remotely the behaviour I would anticipate from a vaunted Administrator. Just terrible especially in light of the fact that I presented FACTs, something that apparently is lost in this forum.

Decline reason:

Far too much vandalism from this IP. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 08:26, 7 December 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I edited one page with the correct information and appropriately sourced it. How is that Vandalism??? Please remove this block. This is insanity.

Decline reason:

Your editing history is full of personal attacks, childish petulance, and edits which are either deliberate vandalism or else an indication that you really can't understand what is suitable and what isn't; in either case, unblocking you would not benefit the project. Since posting a string of unblock requests which fail to address the reason for the block serves no purpose other than wasting administrators' time, your talk page access will be removed for the duration of the block. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:38, 7 December 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.

January 2016[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at FC Bayern Munich. Qed237 (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2016 (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.

August 2017[edit]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Kevin-Prince Boateng. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Sébastien Pocognoli— because it did not appear constructive. 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. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 07:06, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stats in football players' infoboxes[edit]

Hi, when you update the stats in football players' infoboxes please remember that you should also update the |pcupdate= (or |club-update=) parameter. This shows when the stats were last updated and prevents editors from accidentally updating the stats again. Thank you. --Jaellee (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Justin Kluivert. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.