User talk:174.85.55.12

January 2018
Hello, I'm Gareth Griffith-Jones. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Henry Kissinger have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith&#8209;Jones&#160;The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 15:02, 12 January 2018 (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.


 * Hi Gareth. I guess it depends on what we mean by "constructive". If our intention is to protect the interests of the American empire, my edit was indeed not constructive to that cause. If our intention is to log a straightforward encyclopedic entry about our civilization's history to be read by the current and future generations, my edit was indeed constructive.

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Fascism for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 11:51, 30 January 2018 (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.

March 2018
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Mohamed Atta has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:54, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Mohamed Atta was changed by 174.85.55.12 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.941138 on 2018-03-06T00:54:47+00:00.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Mohammed Atta, you may be blocked from editing.  Acroterion   (talk)   01:00, 6 March 2018 (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 9/11 Truth movement shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.  Acroterion   (talk)   01:14, 6 March 2018 (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.

--Neil N  talk to me 01:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Blocked
Since you can't edit nicely, you don't get to edit at all. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Your statement acknowledges that your block was punitive. This goes against Wikipedia policy as stated. It is false that I made personal attacks towards other editors. Neither did I break the three-revert rule. Thus your block reflects a lie. It is not personal to state that this is immoral and, if one believes in karma, not good karma. Be well. 174.85.55.12 (talk) 02:26, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

March 2018
Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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:.  Acroterion   (talk)   12:35, 9 March 2018 (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.

October 2019
Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for abuse of editing privileges. 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:. Guy (help!) 09:18, 24 October 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.

It's not "your" encyclopedia, my friend. :) Do you believe the University of Alaska Fairbanks to be kooky? Because they determined scientifically that the idea that the World Trade Center 7 building collapsed due to fire from a plane crash in the building next to it, is physically inconsistent. I was blocked from editing Wikipedia because I added the word "allegedly" to the statement that Mohammed Atta brought down the World Trade Center, a claim that has not been verified and has university studies going against it. I was upholding a neutral POV. Your disinterest in academic scientific evidence that is not part of the official narrative of the federal government negates your claim that Wikipedia acknowledges what has been verified, and supports my statement that "your" encyclopedia organization functions like a cult. I reckon the University of Alaska Fairbanks is not a neutral source, because you say so, eh? The Free Encyclopedia, like the Ministry of Truth. Orwell is laughing at ya, friend! Be well. 174.85.55.12 (talk) 01:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Not kooky maybe, just wrong and funded by cranks. For the record, here's a discussion where one person points that that their 13 page critique, published during the public comments period, was not included in the public comments section - the thread also has various other critiques. And this site has the report in full with criticism of various sections (search for RK:). Note, I have no intention of discussing this, and until reliable academic sources discuss this report it doesn't belong anywhere on Wikipedia. Doug Weller  talk 13:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)