User talk:47.221.166.65

March 2019

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to The Great Replacement conspiracy theory, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 17:22, 16 March 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.

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 The Great Replacement conspiracy theory., you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 17:24, 16 March 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 violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. Acroterion (talk) 17:30, 16 March 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.

So you are calling the Hungarian Prime Minister a conspiracy theorist? He states:"‘United States of Europe’ Plotters Using Mass Migration to Create ‘Post-National, Post-Christian’ Super-state"

OR:

the ‘Soros Plan’ to flood the continent with an unlimited number of third-world migrants. On Friday, the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) adopted a report on the amendment of the Dublin Agreement, which regulates the EU’s Common Asylum System, which would see all member states forced to accept asylum seekers against the will of their people and for funds to be withheld from nations that refuse to comply.

“The musket is not only primed but loaded: in Europe in the future a permanent and mandatory migrant relocation quota mechanism will be established, with no upper limit on numbers: the mandatory relocation quota,” Mr. Orbán told press.

Or Junker himself - "Claiming that the continent “will clearly need immigration in the coming decades”, he said EU nations “have to provide [Africans] who want to come, and are able to come, and whose situation makes it possible for them to come, with legal paths to get to Europe”"

Neutral Point of View? You post leftist bullshit which is against science, against fact and utterly COMMUNIST in nature and decry corrections for science. To hell with you.l

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 17:33, 16 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

This communist editor cites "the great replacement as a conspiracy theory" and when I corrected for that they blocked me. Please see the Kalergi Plan -"continental Europe should be changed by the integration of different foreign races and cultures. In this way a cosmopolitan Europe would be created, multi-cultural, multi-raced, eventually all becoming mestizos, or a mixed people, all with low intellect, easy to be ruled over by Jewish “supremacy.”" It is a far cry from a conspiracy theory it was an actual plan put in practice. See also any documentation on demographics by race in the USA." See also "United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs "Replacement Migration : Is it a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations". Karl Junker states he supports the great replacement - " Claiming that the continent “will clearly need immigration in the coming decades”, he said EU nations “have to provide [Africans] who want to come, and are able to come, and whose situation makes it possible for them to come, with legal paths to get to Europe” Hardly conspiracy theory unless you consider an active United Nations plan a conspiracy. Europanics have been reduced from 90% of the population to 70% today and less than 50% of births. This is hardly conspiracy. I have now provided sufficient evidence to be unblocked. If you fail to do so you are mind twisted evil anti-science leftists who are hell bent on distorting the truth. How dare you. People like you and your communist ilk resulted in the death of 100 million people is that the ideology you support? for shame you are monsters and unworthy of curating this site.

Decline reason:

Requests that contain personal attacks are not considered. 331dot (talk) 18:41, 16 March 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.

Don't alter other editors' comments, and don't change declined unblock reviews [1] - make a new one, and I strongly advise you to reconsider your approach to interacting with other editors. Acroterion (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

331dot (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 23:48, 13 April 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

my edits were not disruptive. I simply listed hard facts on the talk page of the great replacement article that the article had many mistruths which were not supported and cited fact by fact why that was the case. That simply cannot be considered disruptive editing or do you consider the truth disruptive?

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. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:15, 20 April 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

The block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia because pointing out errors on a wikipedia web page in the talk section with cited facts is normal and correct behaviour it is not a disrupting event. 47.221.166.65 (talk) 20:36, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Removing talk page access per WP:IDHT. 331dot (talk) 20:54, 20 April 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.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of Sat, 13 Jul 2019 22:45:17 GMT for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. 331dot (talk) 20:54, 20 April 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.

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.