User talk:208.87.236.180

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).

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

---

Request reason:

per special:diff/1146694343. --208.87.236.180 (talk) 15:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The block has been anon-only since that discussion. Feel free to create an account. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:30, 18 May 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.

@Jpgordon: another editor (oshwah) blocked the range with ACB. please see 208.87.232.0/21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · block user · block log). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.236.180 (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, and I see why. It's short term, Oshwah is clearly hoping this long term abuser doesn't come back again. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mr Xaero. I noticed that you recently removed content from Dehumanization without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. 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. — Mr Xaero ^☎️ 18:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making abusive or otherwise inappropriate edit summaries or comments, as you did to Dehumanization. Your edit summary or comment may have been removed. Please communicate with civility and refrain from making personal attacks. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 21:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Biohistorian15 (talk) 10:44, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you please clarify what "banned user" you are referring to in this edit? The text you are editing has been stable for over a year at least. Unless the sockpuppetry is recent and obvious, claiming to be reverting a sockpuppet without further clarification in your edit summary is not helpful. Please name the sockpuppet account or, especially if the edit was long ago, the date of the edit you are reverting, so that others can verify what you are doing. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 19:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was added here by a prolific Arab nationalist sockpuppeter who took umbrage with the idea that the invading Arabs were colonisers, without discussion, and without sources. 208.87.236.180 (talk) 00:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks for the follow-up. R Prazeres (talk) 01:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]