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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am not using a proxy, and the accusation of "disruptive editing" is outrageous and false. 57.133.22.174 ( talk) 16:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

Confirmed proxy. Yamla ( talk) 16:33, 6 July 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.

You want to see disruptive? See a user who is repeatedly reverting clearly explained edits for absolutely no reason; adding messages to talk pages that have already been removed; making false accusations of vandalism; and adding nonsensically bad text to articles. I wonder why you are not in the slightest bit bothered about that. 57.133.22.174 ( talk) 16:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Are you new to Wikipedia? If not, do me a favour and tell me some of the other IPs and/or accounts that you've used.  — Small jim  16:19, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

You really expect me to respond to such an aggressive assumption of bad faith, that you post after completely ignoring what I wrote above? 57.133.22.174 ( talk) 16:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you.  — Small jim  16:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Good one. Keep on enabling disruptive editors. Keep on slandering productive ones. Do you have the slightest idea what Wikipedia is for? 57.133.22.174 ( talk) 16:42, 6 July 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).

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

---

Request reason:

It is not a proxy, and User:Smalljim should withdraw their personal attack.

Decline reason:

It is a proxy, and you are evading a community ban. Talk page privileges revoked. Favonian ( talk) 17:11, 6 July 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.

Can you explain Removing content from an article? I agree this might not be a proxy but the edit I cited is clearly vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.141.21 ( talk) 16:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply