User talk:76.22.19.239

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Attention:

This IP address, 76.22.19.239 (host: c-76-22-19-239.hsd1.wa.comcast.net), is part of a pool of dynamically allocated addresses and is registered to the following organization Comcast Cable Communications Inc.. Applying an indefinite block to this IP is not appropriate, unless it is a soft block, because the IP address will later be reallocated to a different, unrelated, and unsuspecting user, thereby impairing access to Wikipedia in an inappropriate fashion. Comments left on this page may be received by other users of this IP and appear to be irrelevant. Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking. In the event of vandalism from this address, efforts can be made to contact Comcast Cable Communications Inc. to report abuse.

The best approach is to determine the CIDR IP numerical address range and make a higher-level decision to soft-block the entire range. http://www.arin.net/ (for approximately North America) and related sites can help to identify that range. Caution is advised when applying a range block as other Wikipedians, both registered and otherwise, may be affected.

If you are an unregistered user operating from this address, note that this need not necessarily be the IP address of your machine. If you are frustrated by irrelevant comments appearing here, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself.

Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking - if a block is needed, administrators should consider using a soft block with the template {{anonblock|optional comment}} as the block reason.


[edit] March 2008

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —slakr\ talk / 17:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Clayton Bennett. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Chicken Wing (talk) 23:04, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Coug It, you will be blocked from editing. Chicken Wing (talk) 03:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

And your very next uncivil comment to another editor or personal attack is going to earn you a lengthy block. That's not the way we work here, and if necessary, you can be prevented. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 23:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

So this Chicken Wing can basically bait and get away with it is that how it is Rodhullandemu?

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Talk:Clayton Bennett. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Referring to other people on Wikipedia as "fools" is not acceptable. Chicken Wing (talk) 23:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

My bad. So the question hasn't been answer. What right do you have? That's a conflict of interest. Explain. BTW, get your email yet?

Per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#More personal attacks regarding Clayton Bennett article, and after reviewing prior contribs, I have currently blocked all editing from this IP address for one year. You can request an appeal via the {{unblock}} template. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I support this block. Bearian (talk) 00:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "One year? If you would give me another chance I won't pull this again. Just had issues with Mr. Chicken Wing editing EVERYTHING on the Clay Bennett article, including true factual tidbits. So the edits got uglier knowing even if they were true they'd be gone. Look at since I've left, there've been more vandals on that page. I'd like another chance even if it's a couple of weeks but I've never been told I'd be blocked for a year, it's a little extreme considering most people are given a week or two from what I've seen. This is a community IP address and I don't think everyone should have to deal with it because of me. I'll be good if allowed back. Thank you for your time."

Decline reason: "Among many unacceptable edits, this one stands out. Users who make threats like that do not belong on Wikipedia, ever. —Daniel Case (talk) 15:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Again, I said I was sorry. I think a year is drastic. I'd like to have a fair fight, Chicken Wing has been baiting many and he reaped what he sowed. I'm saying I'll stop if given a fair block (a couple of weeks or so) but a year is ludricrious. If given FAIRNESS I'll cease the nastyness, if not I'll just use my local library system, and an IP changer and get worse.. SO unless you want to BAN EVERYONE in SEattle using Comcast or a library computer I think you should review it fairly. I think I deserve a fair sentence, with a short leash. But if I come back here on my own without being given a chance I'll act accordingly. Remember, I was given a warning and ASKED A QUESTION ON MY OWN TALK SPACE PAGE (about conflict of interest) and got banned for it."

Decline reason: "Blackmail will not get you unblocked. Due to your continued threats...denied. — IrishGuy talk 21:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.