User talk:50.235.102.246

September 2016
Hello, I'm MelbourneStar. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Hebrew language 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. —MelbourneStar ☆ talk 14:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * 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.

March 2017
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Gregg Costa has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2017 (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: Gregg Costa was changed by 50.235.102.246 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.957302 on 2017-03-23T16:04:10+00:00.

Block
I have blocked this account for 12 hours, because this account has been used for intermittent vandalism. Blocking the account will: -- PBS (talk) 09:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) stops any more vandalism for a short time.
 * 2) leaves a clear trail of a report on this account.

September 2017
Hello, I'm William Avery. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Hans Adolf Krebs 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. Thanks. William Avery (talk) 19:48, 8 September 2017 (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.

November 2017
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. 2601:188:180:11F0:F11B:E449:55C1:762E (talk) 19:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. 2601:188:180:11F0:F11B:E449:55C1:762E (talk) 19:16, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

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 for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Widr (talk) 19:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The block will release spontaneously in six days time. You will appreciate that we cannot know whjose fingers are on the keyboard. As explained in the block notice, you can edit if you create an account.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 23:02, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not the one behind the disruptive edits, and I don't plan on ever editing Wikipedia without good intent. While I can't speak for any of the other students at this school, based on the fact that vandalism from this IP account doesn't occur that frequently, it shouldn't be too much of a problem if you just increase filter sensitivity for edits from here to maximum sensitivity instead of making any blocks.50.235.102.246 (talk) 19:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, this IP section is used by The Emery/Weiner School, which has over 500 students, so a lot of involved people are affected by this block. Also, the no-evidence-that-long-term-vandalism-would-occur reason still applies.

Do I need to include examples of edits that I'd make once unblocked? Here's something that I'd add to WP:LIGHTBULB:

How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
 * One to notice it went out, and slap a Lightbulb is burned out tag on it
 * One to patrol Category:Lightbulbs that are burned out, and remove them all with an automated script
 * One to notice the removed lightbulb, and slap a Lightbulb is removed tag on it
 * One to patrol Category:Lightbulbs that have been removed, and re-install the burned out lightbulb with an automated script
 * One to notice that the previous editor used an automated script to install a burned out lightbulb, and report them to ANI
 * Fifteen to comment at ANI on whether this is a cause for blocking
 * One to close the ANI thread as "more heat than light"
 * One to propose on the talk page that the lightbulb be replaced
 * One to finally replace the lightbulb manually
 * One to revert the replacement, with the message "Please gain consensus before removing any lightbulbs"
 * One to edit war the replacement lightbulb back in
 * One to edit war the original lightbulb back in (saying "please don't edit war")
 * Six to continue the edit war, including one to remind them of the 3 revert rule and two others called in to avoid violating 3RR
 * One to request for protection
 * One administrator to protect the page (with the burnt out lightbulb in)
 * One to claim "admin abuse" of lightbulb protection privileges
 * One to post the issue to Jimbo Wales' talk page
 * Two talk page stalkers to provide their opinions instead of Jimbo
 * One to demand an RFC on the subject
 * Twelve to participate in the 30-day RFC
 * One to close the RFC as "no consensus"
 * One to put in the replacement bulb anyway, with an edit summary "this is the stupidest thing I've ever seen"
 * One to file another report at ANI for "Breach of WP:CIVILity and egregious Personal Attacks"
 * Seven to comment at ANI whether this was uncivil or not
 * One to close the ANI thread with "user warned" several days after everyone else lost interest

So, by my count, 62.

(Unless somebody notices the lightbulb isn't working. Oh heavens, here we go...)


 * Another 62 to conduct the same process of replacing the lightbulb, only to find that that lightbulb doesn't work either
 * Another 62 to conduct the process a third time
 * One user to finally deduce, correctly, that the problem is not with the lightbulb, but instead with the power source
 * One user to try to investigate the problem, run into a permission error, and then ask for help in the talk page of the page with the burnt-out lightbulb
 * Twenty users to post a total of fifty-one replies about what should be done
 * Five IP users to try to post an edit request concerning the lightbulb on the ANI but give up because it has just been semi-protected due to recent vandalism
 * A sixth IP user to finally post an edit request on the ANI's talk page
 * One archive bot to archive the thread after a month before any confirmed users noticed it
 * Four hundred fifty more users to repeat the cycle twice more after everyone forgets about it for a while after each time
 * Two hundred twenty-five users to get the semi-protected edit request on the ANI's talk page for the fourth time
 * One confirmed user to notice the semi-protected edit request and post it on the ANI an hour before the thread was scheduled to get archived
 * Two administrators to conduct an investigation and find that a vandal redirected a key redirect in the power line to his talk page
 * Five administrators to attempt block the vandal but get permanently blinded due to the 2^4,096 lightbulbs shining on the vandal's talk page
 * One administrator to finally have the good sense to redirect the power supply before blocking the vandal
 * Twelve administrators to discuss how long to block the vandal for
 * One administrator to block the vandal for a month
 * Another to increase the block to three months
 * Another to increase it to six months
 * Another to increase it to a year
 * One Wikimedia Foundation employee who is also in the Staff global group to set the block to four months and prevent it from being further edited
 * Five hundred more administrators to deal with the vandal's twenty sock-puppets (twenty-five administrators per sock-puppet)
 * One hundred five lawyers to sue the vandal in real life on behalf of the blinded administrators for compensation for the permanent blindness
 * One judge to merge all of the cases and then sentence the vandal for life
 * One bot to remove the redirect due to a coding error
 * One user to undo the bot and report a false positive
 * Another bot to redo the previous bot's edit
 * Two coders, one to fix the coding for each bot
 * One Wikimedia Foundation employee who is also in the Staff global group to permanently redirect the redirect to the lightbulb
 * One user to notice that the power spike caused the lightbulb to break and slap a Lightbulb is broken tag on it
 * One to patrol Category:Lightbulbs that are broken, and remove them all with an automated script
 * One to notice the removed lightbulb, and slap a Lightbulb is removed tag on it
 * One to patrol Category:Lightbulbs that have been removed, and re-install the burned out lightbulb with an automated script
 * One to notice that the previous editor used an automated script to install a burned out lightbulb, and report them to ANI
 * Fifteen to comment at ANI on whether this is a cause for blocking
 * One to close the ANI thread as "more heat than light"
 * One to propose on the talk page that the lightbulb be replaced
 * Five to discuss this on the talk page, reaching no consensus either way
 * One to finally replace the lightbulb manually
 * One to revert the replacement, with the message "Please gain consensus before removing any lightbulbs"
 * One to edit war the replacement lightbulb back in
 * One to edit war the original lightbulb back in (saying "please don't edit war")
 * Six to continue the edit war, including one to remind them of the 3 revert rule and two others called in to avoid violating 3RR
 * One to request for protection
 * One administrator to protect the page (with the burnt out lightbulb in)
 * One to claim "admin abuse" of lightbulb protection privileges
 * One to post the issue to Jimbo Wales' talk page
 * Two talk page stalkers to provide their opinions instead of Jimbo
 * One to demand an RFC on the subject
 * Twelve to participate in the 30-day RFC
 * One to close the RFC as "no consensus"
 * One to put in the replacement bulb anyway, with an edit summary "this is the stupidest thing I've ever seen"
 * One to file another report at ANI for "Breach of WP:CIVILity and egregious Personal Attacks"
 * Seven to comment at ANI whether this was uncivil or not
 * One to close the ANI thread with "user warned" several days after everyone else lost interest
 * One IP editor to ask whether or not a fluorescent lightbulb should be used instead on the talk page
 * Thirty-one users to get into a discussion about whether or not a fluorescent lightbulb should be used
 * One user to replace the incandescent lightbulb with a fluorescent lightbulb, citing a seventeen-to-fourteen consensus for doing so
 * One user to undo the edit, claiming that this is not a sufficient majority
 * Twenty-three users to participate in the resulting edit war
 * One administrator to block sixteen of the participants in the edit war
 * One administrator to extended-confirmed protect the page with the fluorescent lightbulb on
 * Another administrator to open up an abuse-of-admin-powers investigation, since incandescent was the page's original state
 * Seven administrators to discuss and come up with no conclusion
 * One IP editor to bring up LEDs
 * The Wikimedia CEO to delete the page before anyone else gets blinded or blocked
 * One new user who was never told this story to create a page with the same title as the deleted page…

March 2018
Hello, I'm Classicwiki. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Dwight D. Eisenhower 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. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 15:46, 7 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.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to History of vice in Texas. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Serols (talk) 18:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of kings of Athens. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 21:21, 16 November 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 2019
Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Halt's Peril 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) 15:34, 21 March 2019 (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.

May 2019
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Cyprus dispute. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Danski454 (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2019 (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.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Cyprus dispute, you may be blocked from editing. Danski454 (talk) 18:51, 13 May 2019 (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.

October 2019
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Danuel House. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. P. D. Cook Talk to me! 20:18, 29 October 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 stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Florence Shapiro, you may be blocked from editing. P. D. Cook Talk to me! 20:20, 29 October 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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ji-man Choi. P. D. Cook Talk to me! 20:21, 29 October 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.

January 2021
Hello, I'm Bagumba. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Trae Young 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 Teahouse. Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 16:20, 19 January 2021 (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.

May 2021
Hello, I'm NightWolf1223. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to The Course of Empire (paintings) 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 Teahouse. Thanks. NW1223 &#124; Howl at me 17:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to The Course of Empire (paintings). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  -Jamesluiz102-  (talk)   (contribs)  17:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
Hello, I'm The Tips of Apmh. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Samson Raphael Hirsch 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 Teahouse.   The Tips of Apmh (talk) 17:16, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

March 2022
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. -- a lad insane (channel two)  15:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

August 2022
Hello, I'm Hey man im josh. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Chris Olave—because it 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Hello, I'm Hey man im josh. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Thomas Lynch Jr.—because it 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:35, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Thomas Lynch Jr.. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:37, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

January 2023
Hello, I'm Tutwakhamoe. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Tallie Medel 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 15:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Tallie Medel. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ... disco spinster   talk  21:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

February 2023
Hello, I'm Procrastinator acc. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to American imperialism 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Procrastinator acc (talk) 18:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

 You have been blocked temporarily from editing to prevent further vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. --Vsmith (talk) 18:40, 17 February 2023 (UTC)