User talk:93.108.241.188

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, such as the ones you made to Patrick Swayze. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create a named account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

Create new pages and rename pages
Edit semi-protected pages
Upload images
Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

Note that in order for the first three features to be available, you must have had an account for a certain number of days and made a certain number of edits.

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (93.108.241.188) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! JesseRafe (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

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, as you did at Patrick Swayze, you may be blocked from editing.
For adding personal opinion to the page's infobox. Please discuss on the subject talk page, do not re-add. JesseRafe (talk) 17:32, 23 January 2019 (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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Patrick Swayze. JesseRafe (talk) 18:59, 23 January 2019 (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.

Notification: Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for Vandalism. 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 {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:43, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What vandalism? I was adding new information! What is this? This is a travesti!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 10:44, 31 January 2019 (UTC) There are always the Wikipedia useful idiots that have no more mental abilities than the ones of reverting other people's good faith contributions!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 10:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

What vandalism? I was adding new information!

Decline reason:

Given the above statements, no point even investigating. Yamla (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

February 2019

Your additions of full names and titles to List of Prime Ministers of Sweden and italicising the names of the prime ministers in their articles is not helpful and not inline with the style of biographies, please stop. --Marbe166 (talk) 14:56, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing information isn't helping!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 14:57, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your actions will only lead to you being blocked again. --Marbe166 (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Threats just to be the undisputable Kings of Wikipedia!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 15:01, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hakken. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Ana de Armas, 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. Hakken (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2019 (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.

Hi. I've reverted a lot of your edits today because you've been adding a "Biography" heading to biographies. The entire article is a biography, there's no need for a section within it saying this. Can I suggest you get acquainted with the manual of style on biographies before you do too many more edits? Please don't be put off by this. We all live and learn! --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:58, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most of all other articles have it!... At least replace it for another term!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 13:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most articles do not have it. Please read the manual of style on biographies and don't make up your own styles for articles. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:18, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But they have a title for the main body of the article post-introduction!... Use Life, Career, specify or something, please!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 13:23, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not unusual for short biographies to have no sections. If we add one section (like "Career") then you end up with having to separate out sentences that don't apply to their career, and then you end up with tiny sections consisting of just one sentence that look ridiculous. You've been given some good advice here by others and myself, please take it on board. Wikipedia has ways of doing things that you need to follow. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:41, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In small biographies, specially the ones that already include the main part of the article in the introduction, I add nothing, I hope someone else to rearrange it!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 13:48, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've also removed personal information you added about someone's sister. That person is not notable in themselves and has a private, personal life that Wikipedia does not report on, and certainly not without a reliable source to cite it. Please do not re-add it unless you can produce a source and a good explanation why it should be in the article.

Please also read what original research is. Wikipedia doesn't use it. You can't work things out yourself, you need to get them from the sources. No matter how right you think you are.

You also need to stop reverting things when challenged. This is edit warring and will get you blocked. You have good intentions, and some of your edits are good, but you need to listen and co-operate with other editors. You'll get no-where ignoring them and trying to impose your own way against Wikipedia policy and manual of style. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:55, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other people start those wars, often invoking their Wikipedia Bible, but almost always without justification!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 14:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Julian McMahon. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week 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 ~~~~}}. Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2019 (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.

Again, revengism without reason, abuse of power, disproportionality, etc... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 16:15, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read and reread WP:BLP (particularly Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Challenged_or_likely_to_be_challenged and Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Role_of_administrators) and WP:V. If you cannot see the problems with this edit, and I have zero tolerance for negative unsourced BLP, then I doubt you have the competence| required to edit this encyclopedia. Please follow the instruction in the block notice to appeal this block, if that is your wish. Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:55, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with that edit. The information about his sister is on his father's article, and the Esquire part is common knowledge of anyone with a minimum of knowledge of the British Honours System. If you are so ignorant, then I am sure you do not have the competence required to edit this encyclopedia, let alone playing its Administrator, and I have zero tolerance for mentally challenged people who claim to be smarter than me!... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 17:00, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/G.-M. Cupertino, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Ronz (talk) 17:28, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now witch hunting too?... 93.108.241.188 (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And how am I supposed to deffend myself if I'm blocked? See how this is? 93.108.241.188 (talk) 17:36, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for block evasion.

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 ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:38, 7 February 2019 (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.

Please read WP:RBI Ta-ta. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:40, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I constantly being blocked for harmless edits, because of some editor that doesn't appear for over 10 years and might even be dead?! This is insane! 93.108.241.188 (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Hello, I'm Adakiko. I noticed that in this edit to Martin Šustr, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. 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. Adakiko (talk) 11:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I merely corrected the name of the country at the time of his birth. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 11:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Akalanka820. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Vangelis 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 Teahouse. Thanks. Akalanka820 (talk) 11:26, 27 May 2022 (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.

I simply made more precise the country where he died, as appears in other biographies. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 11:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Martin Šustr. Your edits appear to be 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. Adakiko (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was not vandalism, it was the name of the country he was born in. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked by no other reason but the mere accusation of block evasion. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

As you can see from my replies to other users complaints, I have justified the mere three edits they were complainting of: Martin Šustr was not born in "Czechoslovakia" but in the newly created Czech and Slovak Federative Republic, and Vangelis died during the French Fifth Republic. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 11:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did with this edit to Ken Mulhall. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 11:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was Australian; someone forgot to list Australia as his birth country in the infobox. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 11:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 years for block evasion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DrKay (talk) 17:41, 12 June 2024 (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.

And before you waste our time with an unblock request: G-M Cupertino + you = Same editor. DrKay (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Simply because I've added the same information about someone's descendants someone else did, it doesn't mean I'm the same person. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 12:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Even if I accepted this(I don't) that only makes this meat puppetry. 331dot (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

It's not meat puppetry if two people simply agree on adding the same information. It can't be lost simply because someone was blocked. 93.108.241.188 (talk) 15:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This IP and other Lisbon-based IPs on the same 93.108... range have already been discussed, and confirmed as socks, at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/G.-M. Cupertino/Archive. DrKay (talk) 12:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.