Interested in becoming a regular contributor to Wikipedia? Create an account!
Your host, CTA-NEXUB35.ad.adelaide.edu.au (129.127.32.138), is registered to University of Adelaide and may be shared by multiple users of an educational institution, so you might receive messages on this page that were not intended for you.
If you are unable to create an account due to your institution's IP address being blocked, follow
these instructions. If you are
autoblocked repeatedly, contact your network administrator or instructor and request that your school contact
Wikimedia'sXFF project about enabling
X-Forwarded-For HTTP headers on its
proxy servers so that blocks will affect only the intended user.
Administrators: review contributions carefully if blocking this IP address or reverting its contributions. If a block is needed, consider a
soft block using {{School block}}.
In response to vandalism from this IP address, abuse reports may be sent to its network administrator for investigation. Educational institution staff and network administrators wishing to monitor this IP address for vandalism can
subscribe to a
web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
April 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to
Reserve requirement has been undone by an automated computer program called
ClueBot NG.
ClueBot NG makes very few
mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please
read about it,
report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
You don't have to
log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many
benefits. Without a username, your
IP address is used to identify you.
Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask the
Help Desk, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
It appears that you are racing through articles, adding unsourced material, unhelpful edit summaries, ungrammatical content, and removing some quite appropriate content or photos based on your opinion. If you continue this way, you are likely to get yourself banned, so please take some time to read through the guides to Wikipedia editing, and in particular take note of
WP:CIVIL when addressing other editors. You have already had a last warning above, so take heed.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
09:55, 2 December 2019 (UTC)reply
That was a standard welcome message with some useful links, which I posted to throw you a lifeline. Before that you had a block warning, but you have carried on doing damage to Wikipedia that other editors have to waste their time fixing. It's clear from your comments and actions that you don't understand the protocols here.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
04:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Laterthanyouthink, sorry, but I don't see a reason for a final warning. As an admin, I don't find any of their edits blockworthy. I reverted one of their edits because I didn't agree with it, but it wasn't vandalism, and the other edits of theirs I looked at aren't vandalism either.
Drmies (
talk)
05:17, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Drmies, I added that because they had already had a final warning this month (see above). Their additions and deletions of others' material is not justifiable in most cases, often accompanied by inappropriate edit summaries, and (where text is added) ungrammatical and unsourced content. This is degrading the value of some articles, wasting other editors' time and effort that could be better spent on other things, and the attitude of not wanting to pause, read, learn from mistakes and improve is hardly desirable on WP. All I was asking was for them to slow down and also act civilly.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
06:39, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Time is not wasted. Just because you like to whinge doesnt mean that others are not willing to help. And like I said earlier, when I reverted the edits, I tried to put sources. Also, in a couple of articles, sources are NOT needed, because there already are sources.
129.127.32.138 (
talk)
06:48, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
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 ~~~~}}.
You think that is okay huh?
129.127.32.138 (
talk) 07:07, 9 December 2019
(UTC)
Slow down, please
You have been given a welcome panel with links to read, several polite requests, and warnings about the type of editing you are doing, but you seem to be carrying on regardless, without showing evidence of having read The Five Pillars or the Tutorial. Would you please slow down, read through the pages relating to the links on the Welcome panel, and in particular take note of
WP:ES and
WP:RS. You have responsibilities to Wikipedia and to other editors - I can understand that you may be enthusiastic, and this is nothing personal, but it is about keeping Wikipedia as a good resource for others.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
10:09, 9 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Hello, I'm
Laterthanyouthink. I noticed that you recently removed content from
Hong Kong International Airport 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. Your change is not supported by the sources cited. Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
07:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Please do not make summary judgements based on what you think, especially when removing other editors' work. No, if you read the sources, you will see nothing about disruption by the first protests - only inconvenience to passengers. The second (latter, as per the sentence) caused flight disruptions, as per the sources.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
07:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)reply
You say you are wanting to learn, but your recent changes are not showing evidence of this. If you look at
this change you made (with no
WP:EDIT SUMMARY, followed by
my edit (with edit summary), you might begin to learn some of the standards expected of Wikipedia editors. Go back to the Welcome panel above, do some reading and go through the tutorial, before you do any more editing. Good editors here do not rush through articles dropping in as many pieces of info as quickly as possible into as many articles as possible. Each edit needs time and care to ensure that it is appropriate, clearly expressed, properly sourced and explained in the edit summary.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
07:40, 19 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Similar to above,
this edit - please see my clean-up, and see also
WP:MOS. I'm afraid that I don't have the time and patience to re-format and improve all of your sub-standard edits, but I will review and revert those that are not up to standard from now on. And if you carry on regardless, you will be sanctioned after a warning.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
08:00, 19 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Hong Kong may be governed separately, but it is still physically and legally a part of China. Do not remove images/content from articles without discussing it on their respective talk pages first. Read
WP:BRD. If you disagree, you can take it up with the administrators.
MartinezMD (
talk)
07:44, 19 December 2019 (UTC)reply
No, it maybe physically a part of China. But legally, they have their own laws, own money, own immigration, etc. Dont you know? You are the one with the problem you take it to talk.
129.127.32.138 (
talk)
02:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Please source and check info and citations before adding
Again, I ask you to read some of the material linked to on the Welcome panel above, In particular, read why
bare URLs are not a good idea. Also ensure that the article which you add as a source is relevant to the topic. The one you added to White Australia policy was about something else, and I had to re-edit so that the content matched the sources. If you do not take care, you are not only causing work for other editors, but providing poor information to readers. Believe me, I take no pleasure in following up your edits and posting reminders and comments on this page, but your continued repeating of what you have done before suggests that you are not in good faith trying to improve your skills.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
05:33, 3 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Then don't. People can read, they dont need you to to do the edits. Besides, there are countless 'bare URLs' on wikipedia, why do you pick on me? The content on White Australia policy matches the source too. Happy new year btw.
129.127.32.138 (
talk)
05:35, 3 January 2020 (UTC)reply
It didn't match until I updated the article, after another editor had upgraded your citation to remove the bare URL. So that edit of yours wasted two people's time. I am not "picking on" you - but I am alerted to pages in my watch list, and because of your previous record and, being a conscientious editor myself, I randomly check some of your other contributions, that is all. When you are showing some willingness to listen, slow down, make sure you don't publish when you've broken formatting, etc. then you won't hear another peep out of me, I can assure you. If you cared about the quality of Wikipedia, you would not push back at suggestions not to use bare URLs. Even if you don't use a citation template, at a bare minimum you could show the title; but the date, source and access-date are important information to readers and other editors, for assessing the timeliness and veracity of the source. I would like to see you become a better editor so that your contributions are valuable. Happy new year!
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
05:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Another example: you just decided to change the residency requirement for Australian citizenship in the Naturalization article from 4 years (correctly, as per source and main article) to 2 years (incorrect and unsourced). Can you see how you are damaging the credibility of Wikipedia by your actions?
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
06:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Yes, it has changed, as per the 2007 Act mentioned in the main article about Australian citizenship, and the source given, after following a couple more links. My point is, don't add info off the top of your head, which you think is correct, without checking sources. It wouldn't have taken much to check this one.
Laterthanyouthink (
talk)
06:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)reply
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 ~~~~}}.
Why was I blocked?? I did the right thing by reverting one of the articles. And I only reverted it once. The other person did not explain anything and is at fault.
129.127.32.138 (
talk)
08:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Ooops! Sorry. I just went back to the article now and realized my mistake. Sorry about that. But I still think that two weeks is long. How about one week?
129.127.32.138 (
talk)
08:19, 3 February 2020 (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.