User talk:216.241.55.204

Edits that don't belong to User:Ionas68224 made by this IP, since he has had it (June 2009):

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Lily Allen. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Dreadstar † 19:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Deborah Honeycutt has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\bblogspot\.com' (link(s): http://ohbabythatswhatilike.blogspot.com/2008/04/this-blog-endorses-dr-deborah-honeycutt.htm) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

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. 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) 23:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Question[edit]

Can you confirm that you're User:Ionas68224? SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 23:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I'll log in as User:Nevadawp2 and make a null edit. Jonas 216.241.55.204 (talk) 23:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Jonas 216.241.55.204 (talk) 23:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just repeating here what I posted on the COI page. If you're banned, you ought not to be posting, and especially not posting allegations about other editors. Please request an unblock by posting a note on your talk page. You can read how to do it here. But you can't keep on editing without going through that process. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To J Delanoy and Alison[edit]

J Delanoy: The block of User:Paz_y_Unidad was justified, but I am very curious as to what inspired the block. Were you informed of it, and if so, by whom? How (IRC, private wiki e-mail, or some such thing)? Did you just happen upon that AFD and checkuser it because Doc Glasgow said it was a sock? I suspect some secret, backdoor private communication vehicle by which someone informed you, with less than pure intention.

Alison: OK, I won't, but I certainly did not anticipate being blocked over this. It is 12:10 in the morning and I am going to bed in my little apartment in Southern Nevada (we share a time zone, however). Also, I never log out of my jdrand account, nor did I do so when I was active under it. This is why, if I close my browser while actively reading a thread, for 15 minutes after I have closed my browser, it lists me as reading the thread. I wasn't actually reading, but it looked like it. Bye! Jonas Rand 216.241.55.204 (talk) 08:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page[edit]

Any further posting at my talk page is harassment. Stay away. Rhomb (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your response is knowingly lacking in diplomacy; threats are not elements of constructive discussion, especially when based on speculative theories about my intentions. To avoid such misguided speculations, I have stated my intentions, hopefully clarifying them, on your talk page. J.216.241.55.204 (talk) 18:57, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rhomb (talk) 20:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of three months for attempting to "out" someone by revealing information which might be able to be used to reveal the identity of another editor, a violation of the WP:PRIVACY policy. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:01, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is unjust. I did not "out" anyone. The revisions were out right deleted, not even revision-hidden, but deleted, by Nihonjoe on orders by User:Rhomb. These were not an attempt to identify User:Rhomb as anyone, nor did it have anything to do with WP:BLP. This has nothing to do with violation of privacy policy. It does not apply to oversight at all, because it was not an attempt at identification. I asked if User:Rhomb knew who the Wikipedia Review user "Grep" had anything to do with him or her, and then when it was misinterpreted as an attempt to out him, I tried to explain that I was merely asking a question. It was unanswered, of course. And where is the proof that I was the user who posted those IRC logs, presumably User:Ionas68224? J.216.241.55.204 (talk) 23:08, 29 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

per reasons explained in comment above; additionally, Rhomb has now been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Mister Collins despite his/her attempts at evasion. I never insinuated that Rhomb was another user, or tried to identify him/her as another user; I merely asked him if s/he was Grep on WikipediaReview or if anyone knew whether Grep was related to this case. That is not outing at all.

Decline reason:

You're a banned user. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:04, 4 April 2010 (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.

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.