User talk:Jihu 29

August 2024

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Fish as food have 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.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Fish as food was changed by Jihu 29 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.950373 on 2024-08-14T09:33:55+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at TomSka. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: TomSka was changed by Jihu 29 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.860382 on 2024-08-14T10:05:35+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days to prevent further vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Alexf^(talk) 12:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Segregation have 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.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Segregation was changed by Jihu 29 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.863404 on 2024-08-18T15:46:40+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:46, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Graham87 (talk) 03:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should be unblocked because it was a constructive edit that talks more about segregation appropriately. I also put a reference. Jihu 29 (talk) 09:12, 19 August 2024 (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).

Jihu 29 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I tried my best to make constructive edits about segregation, because there were not enough information Jihu 29 (talk) 14:37, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Yamla (talk) 14:42, 5 March 2025 (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).

Jihu 29 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry that I made any unnecessary changes to the wikipedia pages. I will not try to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead. I'm very sorry, kind apologies by Jihu 29 Jihu 29 (talk) 15:05, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That is too vague. You need to go into more detail about what you did wrong, and what you will do differently in future. PhilKnight (talk) 16:00, 5 March 2025 (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).

Jihu 29 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have done wrong about making disrupting editing and making unconstructive edits, next time, I will only edit when I need to. Jihu 29 (talk) 00:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you don't intend to edit, you don't need to be unblocked, as blocks only prevent editing. You may request unblock when you have an edit you wish to make. At that time, you will need to be much more specific about what was wrong with your edits. You've been asked to do this before, and haven't yet- so your next unblock request will likely be your last chance before you lose access to this page, so make it count. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 6 March 2025 (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.

Please place new posts at the bottom; this may be easier to do if you click "edit" and not "reply". 331dot (talk) 10:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Jihu 29 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I acknowledge that I made disruptive, unconstructive edits regarding segregation (16:01, 18 August 2024), Fish as food (09:36, 14 August 2024), and TomSka (10:05, 14 August 2025). I recognize that these edits constituted vandalism and did not contribute positively to Wikipedia. I sincerely apologize for my actions and now understand the importance of making constructive, policy-compliant edits. If unblocked, I will adhere to Wikipedia’s guidelines and only make useful contributions. Thank you for considering my request. I have now reviewed Wikipedia’s guidelines, including WP:VANDALISM and WP:CONTRIBUTION, to ensure that I understand what constitutes constructive editing. Jihu 29 (talk) 13:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I acknowledge that I made disruptive, unconstructive edits regarding segregation (16:01, 18 August 2024), Fish as food (09:36, 14 August 2024), and TomSka (10:05, 14 August 2025). I recognize that these edits constituted vandalism and did not contribute positively to Wikipedia. I sincerely apologize for my actions and now understand the importance of making constructive, policy-compliant edits. If unblocked, I will adhere to Wikipedia’s guidelines and only make useful contributions. Thank you for considering my request. I have now reviewed Wikipedia’s guidelines, including WP:VANDALISM and WP:CONTRIBUTION, to ensure that I understand what constitutes constructive editing. [[User:Jihu 29|Jihu 29]] ([[User talk:Jihu 29#top|talk]]) 13:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I acknowledge that I made disruptive, unconstructive edits regarding segregation (16:01, 18 August 2024), Fish as food (09:36, 14 August 2024), and TomSka (10:05, 14 August 2025). I recognize that these edits constituted vandalism and did not contribute positively to Wikipedia. I sincerely apologize for my actions and now understand the importance of making constructive, policy-compliant edits. If unblocked, I will adhere to Wikipedia’s guidelines and only make useful contributions. Thank you for considering my request. I have now reviewed Wikipedia’s guidelines, including WP:VANDALISM and WP:CONTRIBUTION, to ensure that I understand what constitutes constructive editing. [[User:Jihu 29|Jihu 29]] ([[User talk:Jihu 29#top|talk]]) 13:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I acknowledge that I made disruptive, unconstructive edits regarding segregation (16:01, 18 August 2024), Fish as food (09:36, 14 August 2024), and TomSka (10:05, 14 August 2025). I recognize that these edits constituted vandalism and did not contribute positively to Wikipedia. I sincerely apologize for my actions and now understand the importance of making constructive, policy-compliant edits. If unblocked, I will adhere to Wikipedia’s guidelines and only make useful contributions. Thank you for considering my request. I have now reviewed Wikipedia’s guidelines, including WP:VANDALISM and WP:CONTRIBUTION, to ensure that I understand what constitutes constructive editing. [[User:Jihu 29|Jihu 29]] ([[User talk:Jihu 29#top|talk]]) 13:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Jihu 29 (talk) 13:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)}}[reply]