User talk:180.28.59.165

Excuse Me?
What are You Doing? 32.220.255.230 (talk) 02:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Reverting your vandalism. Stop it, or you WILL be blocked! 180.28.59.165 (talk) 02:26, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * He did nothing but revise an article. 2601:646:8003:6B20:249B:3C4B:3C0E:5089 (talk) 02:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * He vandalized, as did you. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 02:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You vandalized and made fraudulent actions. I have logged in Pankeyk (talk) 02:55, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: the above user has been blocked indefinitely as per WP:SOCK. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

ANI discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User contributions for 180.28.59.165. Thank you. 83.168.141.16 (talk) 02:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Very funny. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 02:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I was told "Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Oman Air destinations. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted.", yet my edits was, and still is correct. How do I challenge this false accusation ? 14.2.79.208 (talk) 05:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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:. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:58, 16 February 2024 (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 your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Chaotıċ Enby  (talk · contribs) 13:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Ok fair enough. I have raised my concerns here at ANI instead. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Why have I been blocked?!

 * If you wish to be unblocked, and to be a productive force against vandalism, the first step is to understand that not every edit you disagree with, and not even every non-constructive edit, is vandalism. Assume good faith, and don't rush to label every edit you wish to revert as "vandalism". And, when people ask you why you reverted them, please explain. Communication is key, and saying "you're the vandal" at anyone looking for explanations is not helpful. Once your block ends, I invite you to take a look at the Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy to work on better understanding this. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 03:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC)


 * If you wish to be unblocked, please do not frame people that they did vandalism. Also good thing. You will be unblocked in 48 hours. You can be grateful because you have an expiration. Avelina925   (talk · contribs) 03:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, 180.28.59.165,
 * It would have benefitted you if you had gone to ANI and explained your poor behavior but instead you mocked the discussion at the noticeboard. The consensus there is that you do not understand what "vandalism" is so you should not be reverting other editor's and telling them that they are about to be blocked. No one misunderstood the situation, they simply looked at your Contribution history and how you have been interacting with other editors. When your block ends, please be a more considerate and intelligent editor, don't try to boss other people around and become a constructive editor. You've barely been editing for one day and you already have been brought to ANI, that's a really bad start for a new editor. Try to be better. Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * "It would have benefitted you if you had gone to ANI and explained your poor behavior but instead you mocked the discussion at the noticeboard" - I guess that's fair enough Liz and I should not have risen to the bait. But to be fair to me, noone likes snitches. That IP should not have reported me to the noticeboard if they didn't want to be mocked and ridiculed. That said, I should have retained some dignity by not commenting further. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 04:49, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You have been blocked for a pattern of behavior, especially towards other editors, that is disruptive. But if you want to know what specifically impelled me to block you, this edit was completely unacceptable. Take some time off and consider your deportment here. This is a collaborative project, and everybody has to act accordingly or it won't work. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * 180, you may not understand the gravity of the situation. When there is an ANI report about you, that means an editor believes you are doing something pretty seriously wrong. If other editors agree, you may face a block - which can be a set time or indefinite - or even a community ban. And if someone is blocked and makes another account to continue editing, that account is also blocked and the chances of them being able to return keep decreasing.
 * The best course of action is to hold back from any mockery, threats, or other uncivil behavior (I am not suggesting you threatened them, but it happens!) and to make your case in the ANI thread for why your conduct followed the Five Pillars that Wikipedia stands on. Ideally you then listen to what other people are saying and if it turns out you are in the wrong, apologize and do your best not to repeat the mistake. Funnily enough, we do like snitches here - because administrators can't see everything or fix everything, so the community relies on every editor to step in and discuss, revert, warn, and/or report behavior they see as damaging to Wikipedia. I hope that helps you understand what's going on a bit more - it can be a little incomprehensible when you start, but we love getting new editors who are keen to help out! StartGrammarTime (talk) 15:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I have reverted the troll Pankeyk's offensive comments from this talk page. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 04:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? Those were reminders. (By different ip user) 2601:646:8003:6B20:A12E:56C0:777D:E05F (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Please refrain from personal attacks on other editors. I'll note you also removed another editor's comment at the same time. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 21:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I was wondering that why would he call Pankeyk's comments a troll? 2601:646:8003:6B20:A12E:56C0:777D:E05F (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Because they are a disgraceful troll who has been logging in and out of that account and using an IP range (2601:646:8003:6B20:0:0:0:0) to harass me here on my talk page. It's a disgrace that they haven't been banned. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 12:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @ 180.28.59.165 Tread carefully. Your block will be expiring shortly. Calling people trolls is not a good look if you want people to believe you are planning to contribute in a constructive manner. I will ignore the fact that you also reverted my comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:12, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Please see ANI thread for details, the user I was addressing is a confirmed sockpuppet and troll account. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Why were my edits reverted?
Hello there, I was editing the article 2020 Akron Zips football team to expand it, and I was trying to add the missing American football roster/Player templates, when my edits were reverted for no reason. Why were my edits reverted? 71.30.91.6 (talk) 13:48, 17 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I don't know the details as this was a few days ago, but I suspect you were vandalizing and got warned for it. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 12:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That foolish "suspicion" contributed to my decision to block you, 180.28.59.165. You gave no reason in the edit summary for reverting 71.30.91.6, you warned them for vandalism (their contribution doesn't look like vandalism to me) and now you reply rudely to a perfectly civil question with an assumption of bad faith. It's disgraceful behavior from beginning to end. Bishonen &#124; tålk 18:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC).
 * If you suspect it's vandalism, it isn't. Please read up on what WP:VANDALISM] is. Wow! &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:37, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 10 days for continuing the pattern of bossing other editors around and falsely accusing theam of vandalism for which you were blocked before. You have completely ignored all the good advice you have received, so I'm going with another block. 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:. Bishonen &#124; tålk 17:51, 18 February 2024 (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.

Request that latest block be rescinded

 * The formatting for the above request looks wrong, I'm not sure why. Please could someone assist? Thanks 180.28.59.165 (talk) 11:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not defending Pankeyk, just a bit suspicious of your accusations against them given your past behavior. If you're accusing me of being a sock of them, I'll gladly invite you to ask a CheckUser to verify I'm not. Also, I don't have an "unhealthy interest" in your case, I just happen to often look at ANI and comment in cases I've been previously involved with. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 11:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If that's easy enough to do then why not. Seems like it would make sense to run those checks on the Avelina account first though no? In any case, I wasn't necessarily accusing you of being a sock so much as pointing out that your behaviour has been equally as disgraceful, biased and disruptive as mine (see points raised in unblock request above). Some sort of acknowledgement of this (whether by you or an admin I don't really mind at this point) would help to put this matter behind us all. 180.28.59.165 (talk) 00:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Blocks are not punishment. They are made to stop disruption. Please describe concisely and clearly how your edits merited a block and what we would do different. Accusing other editors of sock puppetry is WP:INCIVIL and not going to convince anyone to unblock you. (Check users  cannot disprove sock puppetry). Wow. You realy went on the attack there against another user. Please rewrite to deal with your behavior before another admin declines. Please read WP:NOTTHEM &#45;-  Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Noting you've continued the aggressive posture your were blocked for. &#45;- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I acknowledge that I mistakenly defended Pankeyk and that I was, at some point, in the wrong for doing so. For the record, it was because I didn't feel like a block should be based only on the accusations of someone who continually misrepresents any edits they disagree with as vandalism. Although I understand now that the blocking admin made an independent judgement and should be trusted on this — I admit, it was a bit foolish of me to doubt that to begin with. I think we can agree to put the matter behind us, although I wouldn't call the behavior close to equivalent. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 08:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)