User talk:Eldiablo1888

Please stop the disruptive, and pointless, repeated messing with the Firhouse article! Find something useful to do, there is much work here. 178.176.46.74 (talk) 16:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Disruptive editing
Hi! While helping hands are welcome, this account's few edits seem to have followed only one, disruptive, pattern - editing in 2010, 2013/4, and now again in 2018, the location of Firhouse. Please stop. And please do not refer to the Civil Parish of Tallaght, which includes many other districts. In the same way, the many districts of western Dublin are not all now in Castleknock. So, please leave this matter alone, and find better ways to help. With good wishes, SeoR (talk) 14:02, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Constant Disruptive behaviour
Firhouse, Old Bawn, Kilnamanagh....these are all parts of the civil parish of Tallaght. They always have been. Stop being an idiot and ruining this site for everyone. You should be ashamed of yourself Eldiablo1888 (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi again. To reply, you can just use : followed by your answer (and then ::, etc.), it keeps the page more compact and the discussion more readable. And please don't throw personal insults around.  On your point, no one disputes that Firhouse is in the (now little used) civil parish of Tallaght. But this has nothing to do with a district being "in" or "a suburb of" Tallaght as now understood. The civil parishes were often wide areas, and the civil parish of Tallaght includes parts of the Dublin Mountains, as well as Newlands, Ballycullen, Knocklyon and Templeogue - and no one is suggesting that any of these are in Tallaght, are they?  Nor is, or ever was, Firhouse. Years ago, I think someone even called the Council to check, and they agreed - they see Firhouse as forming part of a different sub-area of South Dublin.  Tallaght was just another village, which grew into the modern suburban town it is, and is quite big enough without ascribing extra districts to it.  Now, if you'd be interested in working on good material on the civil parish of Tallaght, for the benefit of readers who need to understand the historical local administration, that would be welcome.SeoR (talk) 20:39, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Firhouse is in Tallaght and has always been part of Tallaght. If Firhouse is not in Tallaght then how the hell is Ballycragh in Tallaght. Your pathetic. You should be ashamed of yourself. Eldiablo1888 (talk) 07:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you please stop your back and forth editing. Thank you. TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 20:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 20:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at EuroBasket Women 2025 qualification. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Kante4 (talk) 20:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. 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:. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * please delete the controversies section if you are going to block me. What is up there is lies, racist and sectarian. You are complicit in racism if you leave it up Eldiablo1888 (talk) 21:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Hello ,

your recent contributions to the article about the EuroBasket Women 2025 qualification appear to be incompatible with the "500 edits and an account age of 50 days" restriction described in the blue box above. Please have a look at WP:A/I/PIA and WP:ARBECR for details.

Best regards, &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 21:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 21:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The restriction applies to this page here too, and further violations may lead to longer blocks. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 21:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Actually, I've checked again and the original content – the one you complained about – isn't related to the Arab-Israeli conflict closely enough to justify sanctions in response to your request for a removal of it. The only person who really directly, on Wikipedia, made a connection between this incident and the Arab-Israeli conflict was you. I'll thus restore talk page access, but you may not use it to comment about the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * (Additionally, my notification came after your complaint and the block isn't about the 500/30 restriction, so I can't complain about the 21:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC) message in this regard, and the talk page access removal was unjustified, sorry.) &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 21:39, 20 February 2024 (UTC)