64.6.124.31

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (64.6.124.31) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! AustralianRupert (talk) 22:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

June 2011

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:John Abizaid. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive; until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. You have been making repeated template changes to Talk pages. Stop.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for Assessment

Hello, I've just removed the long list of articles you requested assessments for here. That page is really intended as a quick way for editors to receive an assessment of an article they've improved. As you don't appear to have worked on any of those articles, it would be best if you just reviewed them yourself - the instructions for this is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/B-Class FAQ --MOLEY (talk) 15:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Molestash (talk) 10:45, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Lat's Talk about your Assessments

Hi! I see you have been adding quite a few assessment to MILHIST articles. If you have any questions feel free to contact me. I have made quite a few backlog edits in time and can clear up some question you may have. A few tips I found helpful in my time here:

• Pictures and infoboxes are key for an article to pass B5. It breaks the wall of text and can help provide clarity for editors.
• If an article seems incomplete it probably is and Fails B2.
• Take your time. I've made mistakes here too but but blind grading is disruptive and accomplishes nothing.
• Finally keep calm. We are all volunteers and help in our own way. While you may find enjoyment out of clearing backlogs others are better at creating the content which is so core to the development of Wikipedia.

--Molestash (talk) 19:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Claudius Smith may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Heselton, editor, ''Will of Hophni [Hoss or Hopkin] Smith, the Brother of Claudius Smith'' (1826) [Will Book, Liber "H", pp. 103–106 of the Surrogate's Court of Goshen, Orange County, NY.
• to the Colonial History of the State of New Jersey'' (1916, vol XXVIII) p. 564–565 [ July 19, 1773 article in "The New-York Gazette", No. 1125, concerning the apprehension of Claudius

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Resetting to zero

There's no need to reset the draft drive page to zero everyday, we'll do it immediately before the drive. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Your reviews

If you never check any of the criteria, why do you bother to rate articles as "start" class ??? 15:38, 25 March 2014 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwmoll3 (talk • contribs)

Yes, this is confusing to me as well. Are you (IP) simply assigning "start" class ratings to articles that are in queue, w/o actually completing proper assessments against established criteria? Please advise. Thanks. JDanek007^Talk 23:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Reviews

Why are you reviewing articles when you are not a member of the project and have not apparently read the criteria?--SabreBD (talk) 15:25, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Talk:England in the Late Middle Ages, 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. Our assessments program is not random process, but deliberate. Mechanically rubber-stamping one article after the next without consideration of the article's content helps no one. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:33, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

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, as you did at Talk:List of battleships of Spain. 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. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

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 may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:I Troop Carrier Command. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

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're being discussed

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Problems with ip assessments. People are discussing whether admin sanctions against you should be sought because they don't like the way you are assessing military articles. You may respond there if you wish. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:35, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of one month for pretending to edit as multiple people, when this IP is being used by Wild Wolf, see this page for details. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, 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.  Atama頭 19:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

December 2014

Hello, I'm GoddersUK. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Talk:7th Indian Cavalry Brigade without 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; I restored the removed content. 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! GoddersUK (talk) 16:49, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

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.

WPMILHIST Assessments

I note that you are make a large number of Template:WPMILHIST assessments. Can I ask you to consider these a little more carefully? For example, I have had to correct that of Talk:London Regiment (amongst others) for criteria B5. Hamish59 (talk) 20:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Please pause!

Your high-speed edits to assorted military-related talk pages, including assessments, appear to be problematic, and you have repeatedly been asked to pause – in fact you have been blocked earlier this year. I must ask you stop and reply to the concerns on your talk page. Failing to do so will result in a long block. Favonian (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Try to provide a summary for each edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history. Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or summarize the changes the edit made. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

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.

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

---

Request reason:

This IP address belongs to the Pottawatomie Wabaunsee Regional Library's main branch located in St. Marys, Kansas. Would like to work on Category:Military history articles with no associated task force. With current block, I can't even create an account to work on the category.

Decline reason:

I see no indication that this is a false positive. You're blocked for precisely the kinds of problematic edits you want to continue making. Also, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wild Wolf/Archive - you have an account already. Huon (talk) 15:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Actually, I do not already have an account, and unless we have meet personally I fail to see how you would know this. Besides, we are supposed to be discussing this IP address, not the sockpuppet investigation of another user. 64.6.124.31 (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

This IP is blocked because the sockpuppetry discussion concluded you're that user. Going by the behavioural evidence, I concur. Huon (talk) 21:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

---