User talk:99.90.196.227

Welcome! Last edited: Last edited by: 19:30, 28 March 2022 (UTC) MalnadachBot (talk · contribs) Interested in becoming a regular contributor to Wikipedia? Create an account! Your host, 99-90-196-227.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net (99.90.196.227), is registered to AT&T (Cicero, Illinois) and may be shared by multiple users, so you might receive messages on this page that were not intended for you. To have your own user pages, keep track of articles you've edited in a watchlist, and have access to a few other special features, please consider registering an account! It's fast and free. If you are autoblocked repeatedly, contact your Internet service provider or network administrator and request it contact Wikimedia's XFF project about enabling X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on its proxy servers so that blocks will affect only the intended user. Administrators: review contributions carefully if blocking this IP address or reverting its contributions. If a block is needed, consider a soft block using Template:Anonblock. In response to vandalism from this IP address, abuse reports may be sent to its network administrator for investigation. Network administrators or other parties wishing to monitor this IP address for vandalism can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

JoeSperrazza (talk) 11:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 06:50, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Timeline of the 2014 pro-Russian conflict in Ukraine. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing.
Note that editors don't particularly care what your point of view is, so long as you edit constructively. Using talk pages as a forum and introducing comments such as this is unacceptable behaviour. Also, remember to sign your comments! Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:06, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 09:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at ELinks. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. DMacks (talk) 20:57, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

novel The Phantom Ship (1839)[nb 4] by Frederick Marryat. This in turn was later adapted as Het Vliegend Schip (The Flying Ship) by the Dutch clergyman, A. H. C. Römer. In Marryat's version, Terneuzen, in the Netherlands, is described as the home of the captain, who is called Van der Decken (of the decks).

who finds himself on an ancient ship with an aged and listless crew.

died at the age of 71 on Sat., Feb. 5, 2011 sataarday 4th March 2011

Brian Jacques died on February 5, 2011 of a sudden heart attack. Saturday night (February 5). “It was sudden,"http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/303422

Liverpool - Brian Jacques, the former merchant sailor and author of the Redwall series of books, died of a heart attack at the age of 71. "We are sorry to relay the news to all of Brian's friends and readers of his passing on the evening of February 5th 2011. His family wish to convey their thanks for the many messages of condolence they have received," states a message on his website.

He died at Royal Liverpool hospital on Saturday night (February 5). ttp://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/internationally-renowned-liverpool-author-broadcaster-3382245 “It was sudden," The Liverpool Echo quoted his brother Jim Jacques as saying. "He had to go for an emergency operation on an aneurism that had appeared on his aorta and they just couldn’t save him.”

Literary legend Brian Jacques, 71, had to have emergency surgery for an “aortic aneurism” - a swelling on the heart’s main artery - but despite attempts to save him he died at Royal Liverpool hospital on Saturday night (February 5).

His family is devastated. He leaves behind a wife, Maureen, and two sons, Marc, a carpenter and bricklayer, and David, a contemporary artist.

Today his brother Jim Jacques, speaking for the whole family, said they were in “deep shock”.

He said: “It was sudden. He had to go for an emergency operation on an aneurism that had appeared on his aorta and they just couldn’t save him.”

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/07/assassinations-by-induced-heart-attack-and-cancer/ Is death by heart attack, burst aneurysm, of cerebral hemorrhage a “natural cause”? Not if government agencies have found a way to influence your heart rate, blood pressure, or vascular dilatation

==Flying Dutchman this is.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistent disruptive editing, as you did at Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Drmies (talk) 19:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

• You are blocked specifically for disruptive comments on Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. Editors agree that your comments are disruptive, though they disagree on whether you're intentionally trolling or just adding incoherent text--but that these edits are disruptive is agreed on. After this block expires, please edit in accordance with talk page guidelines, don't use talk pages as a forum for your opinions and theories, and PLEASE copyedit your comments carefully. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 19:48, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:36, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Solid state fermentation has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 09:49, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Babita arora 10:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• false acusition, the text (which you cleaned) was in wikipedia several years, and was not my. I only added a paragraph wich was obviusly not (c). 99.90.196.227 (talk) 08:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Janusz Korwin-Mikke. kashmiri ^TALK 17:09, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

User talk:Kashmiri answer 99.90.196.227 (talk) 08:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

• Benjamin Netanyahu is generally well licked in the U.S. Will his speech charge that?^[1]

WASHINGTON - 'The House on Tuesday[15/3/3] passed a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security for the rest of the fiscal year,' < as predicted.

Please don't link common English words as you did recently in three articles. See WP:OVERLINK. Also, I have reverted this edit because it wasn't in the sources and there was no logic in it — loss of blood wouldn't indicate the devices were low on the ground. This addition was unsourced, made no sense (what bridge? and how do you march "through" a bridge?) and had a very stramge edit summary. That's four out of your five latest edits that were unconstructive and had to be reverted. If your editing doesn't improve, I'm afraid I'll have to block you for a longer period than your previous blocks. Bishonen | talk 22:35, 8 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Your recent edits continue to be disruptive and have been reverted. Please stop! @Bishonen: JoeSperrazza (talk) 11:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

its most sad. Sometime hedline changing stories change other headlines.

New York Times - 5 hours ago

PARIS — Andreas Lubitz was breathing, steady and calm, in the final moments < Q: what did he breathing? A: French air . 99.90.196.227

This was the day Natanyahu was denaing Natanyahu 'not on my watch'. And day before Israel was denaing to spy on US.

in 'most sad' you can change t to + and depending on fonts you use it may look even more sad.

during Ron Paul campaign in the time of his first victory the hedlines coluded news about deth of Whitney Houston. That was obvious time for us to conclude the most sad MO. The terror real or actored is to change way of thinking of masses by mass media so the othervise obvious will be somehow obscured. This is becouse the truth is self adjusting state only perturbating the state can keep the lie for some time. pesymistic is hovever that each lie need bigger amount of energy to cover the other lies , optimistic (for world peace) is howevwer (calc e:mc2:ih/t) the nuclear bomb energy is not suficient to perturbate the state in the final stage du to it relatively short time of action. So do not dare it -anyway sad mo no chance deceptit.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one month for persistent disruptive editing. 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Bishonen | talk 11:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

If/when you return to editing, please consider the following. I think you are not being intentionally disruptive, but that is the effect of your edits. If you need help, try posting questions here before you edit articles. I think you need to learn more to be able to edit effectively.

Here’s a list of bad quality edits ‘’just from today’’: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. All have been reverted, except the ones you edit-warred back. JoeSperrazza (talk) 11:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Robin said that the co-pilot Lubitz's responses, initially courteous in the first part of the trip, became "curt" when the captain began the mid-flight briefing on the planned landing. Lubitz is thought to have manually set the plane on the descent that drove it into the mountain.[90] The screams of passengers can be heard on the voice recorder in the final seconds before impact[91] but Andreas Lubitz was breathing 'Frnch air', steady and calm, in the final moments^[1] < and you belive someone will buy it?

Please see WP:OR. Thanks. Cassianto^Talk 11:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm JoeSperrazza. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Biodegradation, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. These edits [7], [8] have no cite provided and appear to be original research JoeSperrazza (talk) 09:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Palmyra. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. This [9] another example of problmatic edit you made, shortly after returning from a 30-day block made by @Bishonen:. Once again, you provide no cite of a reliable source. It is either an error, original research, or vandalism. JoeSperrazza (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Once again, your you provided edits [10], [11] that were uncited, had no reliable source provided. They also had a spelling error. I am concerned that you need to ask for help or advice before each and every edit. JoeSperrazza (talk) 09:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Haavara. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not edit war [12], [13] to reintroduce [14] uncited materiel with no reliable source JoeSperrazza (talk) 09:37, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right, thank you, Joe. 99.90.196.227, an edit such as this isn't just original research, it's a personal reflection, something that has no place in an encyclopedia. Joe is right that you need to ask for advice before editing articles. Use the WP:TALK talkpages! And absolutely no edit warring. This is your last warning: I'll block you for 3 months if you persist. Bishonen | talk 09:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Organic mater biodegrade to resale CO2 is rather 18 century original research.

Hi, the issue is that your additions to articles need citations, not that the process being discussed was invented some time ago. I will say that your edit here [15] is an improvement, in that regard, to your prior edits to articles in that you did include a citation - thank you. That edit is also better than your prior edit to that same article today [16] in that you used citation format rather than a raw reference. JoeSperrazza (talk) 18:35, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are doing better - thank you. I'd like to help. Click on this link -> [17] to see what I did to improve the way you added your reference to the Biodegradation article.

• I took the information you added in your edit [18], and little bit more from the referenced journal abstract web page [19], and instead added it to the article using Template:Cite journal.
• Click on this link -> Help:Citations quick reference to see a brief table showing how the use of a citation template is Good, use of referenced "raw" URLs without a citation template is Bad, and use of no reference at all is Ugly (and, in fact, is not acceptable).
• Click on this link -> Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates for some more help on referencing and using citation templates.

Thanks again for improving your editing by using references. I hope you'll see that using citation templates is even better and will start using those. If you need any help, add Template:Help me to your talk page by adding a new section like this:

==How does X work?==
{{Help me}}
Your question.
~~~~

Good luck and thanks for your contributions. JoeSperrazza (talk) 19:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

no it is false zioisiue. the issue is fallacy you propagate in so called free knowledge compendium which is bit of insult to any conscious being. Is it true u break the order of words here?

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 07:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for continued disruptive and incompetent editing after your previous block, such as antisemitic remark here, absurd rationale for edit warring here, and offensive remarks on this very page. For other warnings, see above. 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 appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bishonen | talk 08:36, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

But this news was NYT source (so quite semitic). But the first chronologically source use the z-word a lot. Anyway i was trying to change (seeing yours rampant reaction)

• Saakashvili play now the role of governor in zionist run Ukraine southern regions of Odessa

to

• Saakashvili play now the role of governor in 'self' run Ukraine southern regions of Odessa

so you-z can float in antisemantic falacy

Also you linked here to the older version, with later corrected errors, this is not nice to misrepresented (quite in z-way) the edits in progress. The almost last version was this

There is on internet opinion = Wikipedia is zio co-op (or info-cop) , so let BiDaSic it (LOL) for some period as you insist by blocking this IP.

Your recent editing history at Talk:2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. See BRD for 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 your being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. LjL (talk) 21:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:45, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Aegis Combat System. - ^theWOLFchild 18:51, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

LOL because of this? It is easy to check it is true. The shield was obsolete already in antiquity and after 500 BC Greece was conquested by Persians, Spartans, Macedonians, Romans, Ot.Turks, Bavarian, Germans and finally IMF bankers.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Aegis Combat System. - BilCat (talk) 01:37, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for continued disruptive and incompetent editing after your previous blocks. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block 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 ~~~~}}.  The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:15, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

 The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:41, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:2016 shooting of Dallas police officers. 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. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 19:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 09:56, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Phuzion. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Recent African origin of modern humans— 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. Phuzion (talk) 14:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

because it (the word hoax) is over due there for at least 5 y, see http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/aa.2013.34031 ... acc to my suspicious before 2000 a.d.

Hello, I'm Paul2520. I noticed that you recently removed content from Clipboard (computing) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Please discuss removing large sections on the article's talk page first. paul2520 (talk) 22:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the Rohonc Codex article, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. You may find our linking guidelines helpful in this regard. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Seraphim System ^(talk) 06:11, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Oil painting. 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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges.

As your English is somewhat limited, adding text should only be carefully done, and minimally so. And please do not revert other editors when they are correcting your grammar and spelling, or removing it outright for other legitimate reasons. freshacconci (✉) 14:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Amharic has been reverted.
Your edit here to Amharic was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnMyz_c4G1Y) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 02:40, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Upgrade your boot. It is good for me(and perhaps for others) and is also good for the intelectual property holder who put this yt video for worldvide audience to watch. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 03:31, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Rome. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:24, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LOL don't lie. Posted author cite source which relato refere Διονύσιος Ἀλεξάνδρου Τος Ἁλικαρνασσεως libri XII

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Pannonian Basin. DVdm (talk) 09:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deer revert-er, your revert is err and grossly antisemantic. Plz check prehistory. This renamed chapter has no content related to human deeds. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 01:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the local English variant. "Kilomeres" in this case. See wp:ENGVAR Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 01:18, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is local English variant in(or related to) Pannonia ? Ok i do not object to your language revival. Just change the chapter title accordingly to it semantic content or add content related to prehistory, perhaps moving the geo staff to proper place. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 01:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for persistent vandalism.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:28, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

sure i will continue with this edit later

Despite this narration Russia president Vladimir Putin saying 80-85 % of first soviet government where Jews.^{[1] [2][3][4]}

99.90.196.227 (talk) 13:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A bare <doi> is not an acceptable form of reference for a scientific Wikipedia article. A citation should include authors, year, article title, journal, volume, pages, plus the doi. There are templates which can be used to automatically configure this citation information, or you can type it out by hand, but it is common courtesy that you don't just drop a <url> or <doi> and leave it for someone else to clean up after you. Agricolae (talk) 06:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly robots do it 99.90.196.227 (talk) 16:08, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Except they often don't do it right, and it has to be cleaned up by hand anyhow. Agricolae (talk) 18:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the boot code ? That seem to be almost trivial string task + en.wiipedia.org VM to runit on our servers to easy your admins. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 23:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Easier yet is to just do the citation correctly when you put it in an article, rather than leaving a mess that needs cleaned up.Agricolae (talk) 04:50, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for opinion on SRY imo esier is DRY, KISS. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 05:14, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

However if you explain in detail what was your initial suggestion i will look if it could be automatized .

In detail, my suggestion is that if you are citing something, you give a complete citation. Agricolae (talk) 13:56, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Agricolae (talk) 16:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ok i get it u cant back it it using wp:rs so u use force. Herkuls pupa kiedy głupich kupa 99.90.196.227 (talk) 20:30, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This has absolutely nothing to do with sources or force. It is a simple notification, so that you don't unknowingly violate a strict rule and as a consequence be blocked from editing. Agricolae (talk) 13:53, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not threteninig to use force. So if i edit it back once per 24 hours that will be then OK ?

Please don't be silly; of course it won't ~ that would be edit warring, which you have clearly been warned by Agricolae not to do. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 18:44, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So how to do it ? 99.90.196.227 (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Ares, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You may have a purpose to the edits you made, but what you ended up with made no sense, thus i have reverted it. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 13:43, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

"did not appear constructive"

How you appear creative ? 99.90.196.227 (talk) 16:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The goal isn't to "appear creative"; it is to add constructively to the collection of knowledge that Wikipedia is. If you cannot do that, and currently you aren't, i fear your editing priviliges will be removed ~ again. So, please, be useful and productive; there are any number of links on this page leading to places to help you do exactly that. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 18:44, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And what was against adding "constructively to the collection of knowledge that Wikipedia is" in this edit you demolished by jackhammer ? Or rather explosive because the debris landed on this page. Actually you landed here somehow stunned then writing a lot but quite incapacitated to put trace of reason - why. One meritoric sentence on subject please, to let me hope you had reason cohesive with stated acotutecokotwis goal. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 21:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for Your's meritorious guidance. Now i must know Herodotus wrote something you do not like. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 21:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. El_C 15:31, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

cold you pelse explain hat do you mean? ah do you 99.90.196.227 (talk) 15:45, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I revert your edit for, among other things, changing "finger bone" to "tooth bone". I think your other changes in that edit need to be discussed on the talk page first. - Donald Albury 01:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK - leftover word "bone"

see: Talk:Denisovan#lets_vote_finger_or_tooth

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Skllagyook (talk) 05:40, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edits like this would suggest that English is not your first language.

You can find a list of different language editions at List of Wikipedias. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

it was fixed by me [20] 99.90.196.227 (talk) 05:55, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was not talking about that.

What is your first language? Your home language? Your mother tongue? Ian.thomson (talk) 06:04, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which language you suggest i understand more than dozen ? 99.90.196.227 (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What languages do you know better than English? Ian.thomson (talk) 06:14, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

and you ? I Maybe it will be snap on my passion. The lastly i picking up is Latgalian, and before i was acquiring Livonian. I can post you may transcripts (if you too language passionate) it's dutiful lang but not many videos is on yt. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 06:25, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think you understand. This is not about me. People on this site have trouble understanding you. That is why you need to find a version of Wikipedia in a language you know better than English. What is the language you think your thoughts in? Ian.thomson (talk) 06:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

you refer to that handfull of editors who do not understand me either the scientific paper they trying to digest (or without try deleting)? those who dumbing down the articles to below msm level ? I remember 2 S-somnthing and Agricolae. 99.90.196.227 (talk) 06:33, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, people here do not understand you because you are not good at English. You need to find a Wikipedia that's in a language you can effectively communicate in. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:53, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But i get impression you follow my thoughts? Do you have problem understand me too? 99.90.196.227 (talk) 06:58, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can barely understand you because I teach ESL students. There are still plenty of times where I cannot understand what you are trying to say. You need to find an edition of Wikipedia in your home language.

For example, "But i get impression you follow my thoughts? Do you have problem understand me too?" is wrong. "But I get the impression that you can follow my thoughts? Do you have any problems understanding me, too?" would be more grammatically correct. In this post, you wrote "OK i don't going (yet) do such 'WP:OR?' on ... (i hope it is unnecessery:)" and I cannot figure out what you were trying to say. I'm a native speaker of English, I have a degree in English, I have taught hundreds of ESL students for years and worked with plenty of ESL speakers here -- if I cannot understand you, it is not my fault. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:06, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

they redacted my phone number it is ^{[number redacted again]} available almost 24/7 texting too

Your number was redacted because you weren't supposed to post it!

Talk page access revoked. You are no longer welcome to do anything on Wikipedia except read it. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the block indefinite.

You are welcome to find a different language Wikipedia. Your lack of ability to understand or be understood makes it unlikely you will be able to positively contribute here.

Ian.thomson (talk) 08:09, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick Google translate of a foreign phrase 99 used and found it was Croatian. Perhaps Croatian Wikipedia would be a better fit since you are blocked for the foreseeable future. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]