43.249.196.179

December 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• 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.

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. -saph (user—talk—contribs) 19:25, 20 December 2024 (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.

What are you considering to be disruptive? 43.249.196.179 (talk) 19:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Continually removing categories despite being reverted and without discussion afterwards. -saph (user—talk—contribs) 19:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

I could quite easily argue that editors who do not understand categorisation are blindly reverting. Possibly because I am consided to be one of the undercless IP editors. I actually racked up 10s of 1000s of edits before giving up. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 02:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

And we have no way to verify that other than your saying so. It could be true, or you could be Randy in Boise. Without an account we have no way of knowing. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

You reply is not clear to me. Are you saying that there is no way of verifying that my edits are acceptable by the community? My edits follow the guidelines and as such do not need discussion. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 07:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• 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, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:MrSchimpf, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 20:38, 31 December 2024 (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.

Can you explain what was disruptive. The editor is being vindictive and lack a knowledge of some of the WP guidelines. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 20:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

You're doing things such as removing content from a sandbox in a user's space without permission. You absolutely should never do that. Next time you disrupt again you may be blocked for disruptive editing. Nate • (chatter) 20:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit conflict I am not sure if that is a policy or a guideline. Since I cannot revert it I I get you to remove the page from a Wikipedia namespace category. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 20:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC):

Your obfuscated user name is confusing. I did not realise it was my, ah nemisis, until I looked at the edit history. In the interests of WP you should use you actual username. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 21:00, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Your edits are disruptive and you refuse to discuss them. There is no vindictiveness behind my reversions and editing a user's sandbox without permission is a hard line policy where it's never allowed outside of vandalism reversion. And if you consider other editors as an 'nemesis' you need to step back and see why we are reverting your edits. Nate • (chatter) 21:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

As I have pointed out before discussion is not needed if the edit is a clear application of quidelines. You have to make youself familiar with the huge body of WP guidelines. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 21:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. If your disruptive behavior continues to be ongoing, as explained to you by multiple users above, the matter will be referred to Administrators. Snowycats (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Can you explain what I am doing that is disruptive? 43.249.196.179 (talk) 20:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

It is a content dispute. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 08:09, 1 January 2025 (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.

Final warning

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You were just told to stop editing user talk pages without permission and resumed doing so. You do not have permission to do so except to remove vandalism. Step away before you're blocked. Nate • (chatter) 21:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

It is not disruptive. See WP:UOWN. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 21:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

It is a content dispute. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 08:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Does 2 x final warnings = block? Just asking! 43.249.196.179 (talk) 08:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I just had a look at some of your history. Looks like other editors have had a run in with you. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 08:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nate • (chatter) 21:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

It is quite clear that you do not understand some of the WP policies and guidelines. I am not the only editor that is questioning your edits. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 09:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi. I'm just going to say, consistent use of edit summaries - cordial, mind-numbingly bureaucratic impersonal policy- or reason-based edit summaries - goes a million miles (example). Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:27, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

No point. Waste of time. If I was a vandal (and I am not) I would just lie. This is common. If I was logged in I would do edit summaries. In either case the edits should be checked. WP is suffering because the community did not go for site wide pending revisions/changes. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 08:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing my draft template page

Your repeated destruction of the template at User:Mathglot/sandbox/Templates/Draft projects has been reverted by two users. Your edit summary on your second attempt (diff) is either a bizarre misunderstanding of what a template is, or perhaps gaslighting on your part:

it does not need discussion. This is not social media. And I explained why and why should understand why.

"Social media"? What in God's green Earth are you talking about? It is a template, similar to the {{Draft categories}} template, undergoing development in user space. And "does not need discussion"—whaaat? Have you heard of talking it out, or WP:CONSENSUS? If you disagree with something in this template, fine—bring it up on the Talk page, and let's discuss it. However, if you attempt to vandalize this page again, you will find yourself at the Edit-warring noticeboard. Mathglot (talk) 02:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I am trying to get it out of the Wikipedia category. It does not belong there. You should fix it. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 07:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

If you can show an actual problem I will fix it. It is only a member of two categories, and both of them are appropriate. If you go off on weird tangents about social media or are unable to explain what the problem is, then there is nothing I can do, I'm sorry. Mathglot (talk) 09:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

It is in Category:Wikipedia_categorization. It is transcluded and I gave up trying to figue out wich template was causing it so I removed all the content. I left a message about this on the page itself. It is a sandbox AND a draft AND in user namespace so it soulf not be in a WP category. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 09:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay, finally I understand what you are talking about, now; thank you for that clarification. I will look into this, and see if 1) it is problematic, and 2) the proper way to fix it. In the meantime, something being in the "wrong" category (if that is the case) is hardly an emergency, and can wait for proper resolution. If there is a "next time" for you regarding this type of category-gnoming edit, if you think you see a problem but give up on proper analysis of it, please do not just blow away the content of a template or other page, replacing it with Talk page-like commentary; unless it is an emergency (copyvio, libel, threats of harm or legal action, etc.) just leave the page alone, and raise a discussion on the Talk page instead. A template being in the wrong category is not one of those. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

.

• It was problematic
• There was nothing wrong with my temporary solution in fixing it. You have the edit to fall back on.

If something needs fixing it should be fixed. There is too much talk here. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 07:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Reprise of notification of AN discussion about you

I realize you have already been notified about this AN discussion above by the user that initiated it, but I felt it was only fair to inform you that I have added a comment to that discussion requesting that you be indefinitely blocked as a vandalism-only account. Mathglot (talk) 03:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

You were looking at two different IP addresses. I completely agree with you that this edit is vanalism. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 08:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

If that is not you, then I apologize; but I am watching. Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Collapsible templates

I have reverted your recent edits removing the collapse parameters from templates. Please see the documentation on how to collapse the template in the articles they are transcluded on. Tule-hog (talk) 20:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Instead of reverting why don't you fix it. They are too big. 43.249.196.179 (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

---