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. Khirurg (talk) 15:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You and your friends have been involved in disruption of several articles (specifically regarding Albania), constantly reverting and blocking information you don't like even though is factual and sourced. You should be careful of getting blocked as well.

Information on Wikipedia must be free of biases and censoring. There is a reason why Wikipedia is open for everyone to edit, but it seems you've been trying to block everyone from editing. Your attempts won't last long.

Just by looking at your contribution history we can see who is the one doing edit wars.

If you disagree with a contribution, you explain your reasons and if I'm wrong (which I doubt), then I would agree to change it. Illegally (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 12:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Illegally, do not send me any more e-mail.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Why? I'm not allowed to ask for a comment on your decision to block me?

  I asked that you proper investigate my "accusations" made on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring and not disregard them straight away.

  You also added "WP:LOUTSOCK with Special:contributions/2A02:908:1997:1500:0:0:0:0/64" as a reason for blocking me, which has nothing to do with me. On what basis you came to that conclusion?

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked indefinitely without proper consideration

Decline reason:

The block appears to have been made with proper consideration. No comment with regard to CU data that specific IP address range. Yamla (talk) 13:00, 21 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.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I realize I might have had an initial bad approach to editing as a new contributer and I took it too personal, I would appreciate if you could at least change my block to a less permanent one, I want to contribute to articles I like in the future, and not be part of edit warring anymore. Thanks.

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 realize I might have had an initial bad approach to editing as a new contributer and I took it too personal, I would appreciate if you could at least change my block to a less permanent one, I want to contribute to articles I like in the future, and not be part of edit warring anymore. Thanks. |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 realize I might have had an initial bad approach to editing as a new contributer and I took it too personal, I would appreciate if you could at least change my block to a less permanent one, I want to contribute to articles I like in the future, and not be part of edit warring anymore. Thanks. |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 realize I might have had an initial bad approach to editing as a new contributer and I took it too personal, I would appreciate if you could at least change my block to a less permanent one, I want to contribute to articles I like in the future, and not be part of edit warring anymore. Thanks. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Illegally (talk) 10:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you please explain what specific accounts you're referring to when you use "everyone" in "you've been trying to block everyone from editing" and who "we" are when you state "we can see who is the one doing edit wars" in your post above?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi Ponyo,

  It seemed to me that the user had been reverting edits by made by other people, hence "everyone", no specific accounts to mention, it was just a general look on the user's history. But I guess I might have exaggerated and misjudged that.

  "We" is just a way of expression.

  Thanks for your consideration. Illegally (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]