User talk:XavierItzm

Archives (Index)

2021/June 2021/August 2021/September 2021/October 2021/November 2021/December 2022/January 2022/May 2022/July 2022/September 2022/November 2023/May 2023/August 2023/September 2023/November 2023/December 2024/January 2024/February 2024/April 2024/May

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 104.28.32.206. More and more I find plain home addresses, such as this one, blocked. I don't understand why, if I am logged in, I am prevented from editing. This is quite frustrating, you know?. XavierItzm (talk) 15:28, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That IP address is allocated to iCloud Private Relay. Turn it off, and you can edit. Or add an exception to your web browser that says not to use an VPN when you're on Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:31, 13 May 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.

That's an Apple Private Relay IP, thats why. nableezy - 17:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @XavierItzm, Robert is coming back to the CAHSR article every few weeks to add a series of litte, but overall highly tendentious tweaks and then filibustering the talk page when they get reverted. I am sure you are well aware of this. I have disengaged from the TP more and more, but since I am the one reverting most of the damage, I am accountable for explaining these reverts, such as recently. For this, I certainly want to stick to standards such as no personal attacks -- but it's hard to maintain when it's increasingly about his persistent editing behavior. Therefore, I'd like to ask for your advice if going for WP:ANI at this point is appropriate, or how to proceed best. (I have never encountered such a dispute before.) But I do believe some sort of outside intervention is becoming necessary, because at some point he will persevere with the constant damaging and I don't want to be tied up by this one editor on this one article. DracaenaGuianensis (talk) 18:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ANI is warranted. You can use the personal attack cited here, where the user was given the chance to retract his personal attack. Please let me know after you place the complaint. XavierItzm (talk) 22:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@XavierItzm: Thanks for advising me on this, I just submitted it here at ANI and left Robert a notice. DracaenaGuianensis (talk) 05:34, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]