User talk:90.226.9.16

To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked temporarily from editing. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page:. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.  Tide  rolls  22:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)  Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped." To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked temporarily from editing. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page:. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.  Tide  rolls  22:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)  Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped." −

−		 −	May I ask why you "blocked" me from editing longevity articles? Perhaps you thought my edits in longevity articles were "unconstructive" but then "block" me from doing unconstructive edits only. Was it "unconstructive" to do an edit like this: 90.226.9.16 (talk) 22:33, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Information
Some of your message above leads me to believe you wish to appeal your topic ban. Couple of things, I'm sure any appeal would have to come from your registered account; I could be wrong about that. Additionally, I would advise against making your appeal until you are sure you can explain the issues surrounding your ban and be able to outline how you plan to avoid those issues going forward. In any event, you make such appeals at Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. And stop making such a mess of this talk page. You're making response very difficult.  Tide  rolls  22:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

New unblock request
I want to be unblocked as I think it's unreasonable to block me. Just because I did a little edit in List of Japanese supercentenarians, it does not mean I was doing an unconstructive edit. It was not unconstructive edit and I think it was unreasonable to revert my edit. However, my edit is now reverted back, see. So please unblock me. And I don't think it's reasonable to "ban" me from editing longevity related articles as long as I'm not vandalizing, my last edit in the list of Japanese supercentenarians was not at all vandalism. 90.226.9.16 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You are topic banned from editing any article or talk page with regard to longevity. The more you continue to violate that ban the more blocks you will endure.  Is this fact beyond your ability to comprehend?  Because that will be a whole new problem.  Tide  rolls  17:41, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate editing
Your edits at Chopsticks need to stop.
 * 1) They lack a proper source. WP:RS
 * 2) Wikipedia is not a source for itself. WP:CIRCULAR
 * 3) Copy-pasting text between articles has specific requirements that were not followed WP:CWW
 * 4) You cannot shift responsibility for your edits to another editor as you did in the summary here.
 * 5) If you are describing the information as strange, as you did, you shouldn't be adding it to an article.
 * 6) The text was clearly marked to show that it was problematic. It never should have been copied.
 * 7) The inappropriate paste followed " ", a link which will take users to that exact text. That defeats the purpose of linking. MOS:LINK.

The edit adds nothing but problems. BiologicalMe (talk) 20:31, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

I asked you to stop.
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

July 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy, as you did at User talk:Yel D'ohan. 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:. RexxS (talk) 21:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)