108.6.237.202

  Hello, I'm FULBERT. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Opel Speedster, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. FULBERT (talk) 13:00, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.--Topican (talk) 16:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

The changes made to the ASC page were to put those models in alphabetical order which they were not in before. Why is that not constructive?

The changes made to the Lansing Car Assembly page were to correct mistakes. The Pontiac Sunfire convertible was not made at Lansing Car Assembly; it was made at a different plant in Lansing called the Lansing Craft Center. You can see this on the Pontiac Sunfire Wikipedia page, the Lansing Craft Center Wikipedia page, & by looking at Pontiac Sunfire convertible VIN numbers which I have done. The Chevy Cavalier coupe was only made in Lansing from 1995-1998. Originally, I put 1996-1998 but now I see it's actually 1995-1998. The Chevy Cavalier Wikipedia page says 1996-1998 but I have now confirmed 1995-1998 based on running VIN numbers. I do not see why these corrections would not be constructive. Is it more constructive to leave the mistakes there uncorrected forever? 108.6.237.202 (talk) 17:25, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. 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:

I noticed your recent edit to Opel Zafira does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing →   Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm HMSLavender. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to List of General Motors factories—because it 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 08:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

How does adding information & correcting mistakes "not appear constructive"? That is a vague term which doesn't even mean anything so it's hard to even know how to respond to that. 108.6.237.202 (talk) 08:56, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello 108.6.237.202! Your additions to Wuling Rongguang have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 19:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your work on this. (Whoever your are.) Be well. Charles01 (talk) 06:05, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Buick Skylark into Buick Special. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. BalinKingOfMoria (talk) 01:34, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Ford LTD (Americas), please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

 

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Sumanuil. 05:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I corrected some of the mistakes made when I saw them but I'm not the one who made the mistakes. I don't know who made them. It also looks like someone intentionally tampered with the page since the mistakes are so blatant & I don't think they were always there but I'm not positive on that. 108.6.237.202 (talk) 09:30, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Adakiko. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Volkswagen Polo Mk4, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Adakiko (talk) 08:01, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Volkswagen Golf Mk4. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Adakiko (talk) 10:02, 23 November 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).

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

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 108.6.237.202. Please unblock me. Thank you.

Decline reason:

This IP address is not blocked. Yamla (talk) 14:10, 29 November 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.

User Yamla or anyone else that can help: If this IP address is not blocked, then why, when I click "Edit", am I now all of a sudden getting a page that says "This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia." "The IP address or range ‪2620:0:861:10B:0:0:0:0/64‬ has been blocked (disabled) by ‪ST47ProxyBot‬ for the following reason(s): The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be an open or anonymizing proxy, such as a VPN service. To prevent abuse, these proxies may be blocked from editing Wikipedia." This just started earlier today. Please advise.

That means that you were using a proxy/vpn earlier today. You've disabled it but need to wait up to a full 24 hours in order for the block to clear. --Yamla (talk) 16:03, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

User Yamla: Thank you for responding. I restarted my internet connection but I wasn't using a proxy/vpn as I don't have such a thing as far as I know. I'm using the same connection I have always used (LAN). I didn't change anything, just did a simple restart. Also, the block page says "This block will expire on 12:01, 13 December 2022." It still says that after your last post. Is there anything you can do?

Please wait the full 24 hours. In almost all cases, that resolves the problem. If it doesn't, please make a new request here. --Yamla (talk) 16:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Aptiv, you may be blocked from editing. Dormskirk (talk) 00:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

It's the same source as the immediately preceding sentence. I looked at that source and that's how I found the info. You could've done that too before issuing a cease and desist. Hopefully, now you'll know that for next time. And the source is now listed again for extra clarity. 108.6.237.202 (talk) 09:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for adding the source which does provide extra clarity. Dormskirk (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

  You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to LaFerrari. Materialscientist (talk) 11:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Why are you accusing me of vandalizing? I did no such thing. All I did was put in the brand name (or make) of the LaFerrari. Ferrari is the make. LaFerrari is the model. I don't understand how that is vandalizing. Please explain yourself. 108.6.237.202 (talk) 12:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Vossanova ^o< 23:51, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, there is a discussion regarding your edits to List of General Motors factories and List of Ford factories at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#Lists of factories. Please review and respond. Thanks, --Vossanova ^o< 16:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

  You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Oldsmobile Jetstar I. BilCat (talk) 20:56, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Why do you add these excessive lists of plants? As far as I can tell, no one likes it and you are in constant conflicts with all other editors. When you are the only person in the entire world who is right about something, that usually means you have to reconsider what you are doing.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Zippybonzo. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Pontiac G8 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 or the Help desk. Thanks. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 15:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

What exactly is not constructive here? 108.6.237.202 (talk) 15:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

In the article linked for the platform, it doesn't mention the acronym you added anywhere in it, however the template message doesn't really say much that is helpful in it, so it's not non-constructive, but was undone because it wasn't sourced, and my software doesn't send a message based on what has been reverted, just that it has been reverted. Thanks, Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 15:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

From Template:Infobox_automobile#Platform: The platform field states the name of the platform, architecture or module upon which the subject vehicle is built. If the subject vehicle is not based on a platform, architecture or module, or if the manufacturer has not disclosed this information, leave this field blank. There is no need to include the specific model code in that field; I moved it to the body of the article where it belongs.  Mr.choppers | ✎  16:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

The existing consensus you refer to did not take into account my reasoning as nobody mentioned it in all the previous posts. Therefore, this post is starting fresh and is not beholden to any previous consensus because this reasoning was not considered at that time. And there hasn't been any comment thus far. Read WP:BRD. When you make an edit and it gets reverted, you do not reinstate it. You start a discussion and you await consensus. Please revert your changes, or I will be forced to bring you to the admin noticeboard for WP:SOCKPUPPETRY, WP:EDITWAR, and WP:DISRUPT.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

You are the only one guilty of disruption here. Where are all these imaginary people that are disagreeing with my edits? I don't see anyone disagreeing. You are the problem here. Nobody else has a problem here but you and you are manufacturing a problem where one does not exist. There aren't any commenters or editors that are disagreeing with my edit or that have a problem with my edit. What about that do you not understand? Nobody has even answered my post on the Talk page. Do you understand that? Don't you have anything better to do than chasing people all around wikipedia and constantly harassing them to no end? I know I'm not the first you are doing this to. You are a menace and a serious problem and a disruptor to the peaceful and quiet operation of wikipedia that generally prevails. What you are doing is called stalking in the real (non-digital) world. Are you aware of that? The only reason you revert my edits is to harass me. That much is plainly obvious. You are the one that is warring with me. I'm just trying to get away from you. But yet, you keep following me again and again and again. So who is the real disruptor and the real one warring? Here's a clue: It's not me, it's you. 108.6.237.202 (talk) 22:13, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please re-read the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#Lists of factories. You seem to be ignoring the concerns the other editors and myself have regarding your edits (see also cleanup messages at the top of both lists). You should not consider these lists to be your personal project - see WP:OWN regarding article ownership. If you continue to avoid discussion and add content without regard to Wikipedia guidelines, we may need to protect the pages or revert edits. --Vossanova ^o< 17:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 20:57, 30 April 2023 (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.