178.255.104.153

March 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Roberto Firmino. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. GiantSnowman 07:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Legal threats

Think you might want to take a quick gander at WP:NLT. Ta, Mattythewhite (talk) 18:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

GiantSnowman 20:07, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

178.255.104.153 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

All of this stems from edits I made to Roberto Firmino. I added (all with reliable sources) his marital status, and corrected his penalty for drink driving. This was reverted as "vandalism" by User:Mattythewhite and I was cautioned for the same charge by User:GiantSnowman. I reverted Matty's revert of me, and in the summary I said that he had libelled me by calling me a vandal. In hindsight that was the wrong word to use because it was misinterpreted, but I just meant in general that he had slandered me (is that a better word?) by making a false accusation. I have nowhere near the time to sue anyone, nor any interest to do so.

It should be noted that these two admins have been stubborn and contemptuous. Neither has explained why I was a vandal, nor even acknowledged that they called me one! (see Matty's talk page) Being an admin doesn't mean you can claim ownership of a page and it certainly doesn't mean you can revert factual edits and shout vandal like a witch hunt. The Snowman reverted my edits again, meaning that there is false information on the page concerning Firmino's legal penalty, which is cause for concern 178.255.104.153 (talk) 16:36, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Accept reason:

"I have nowhere near the time to sue anyone, nor any interest to do so." - That should clarify there's no legal threat here. The block has run its course by now, too. That said, I'd advise you to be a little less aggressive and echo GiantSnowman's comment below that edit summaries that explain what the edit does might have helped avoid all of this. Comments like "do you just have complexes that require absolute control", on the other hand, do not help at all. Huon (talk) 20:42, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman:- why did you block this user? His edit was legitimate and sourced, and while he was a little stressed about being reverted and warned, this was understandable. PhilKnight (talk) 01:11, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@PhilKnight: blocked for WP:NLT violation. GiantSnowman 08:19, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

I've re-reviewed and restored the edit. The IP should use edit summaries which detail the changes being made, and not legal threats! He even repeats the threats in his unblock request, so I'm not comfortable ending the block early tbh. GiantSnowman 09:12, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Baedeker— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Serols (talk) 17:17, 6 October 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.

February 2019

Hello, I'm D Eaketts. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Albuquerque, New Mexico 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. D Eaketts (talk) 10:00, 6 February 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.

September 2019

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Isidore of Seville— 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 Help desk. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

---