223.17.64.233

November 2018

You have been blocked temporarily for abuse of editing privileges. Once this block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest it by editing this page and adding the following template with a suitable reason: {{unblock|1=<the reason for your unblock request>}}. If you are logged in, and the option has not been disabled, you may also email the blocking administrator (or any administrator from this list) by using this form. See Wikidata:Guide to appealing blocks for more information.

---

⁠ Hazard-Bot (talk) 16:22, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

31h, edit-warring and socking--Ymblanter (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Unblock request declined This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason. 223.17.64.233 block log • ipblocklist • crossblock • luxo's • unblock • remove gblock • contribs: +/-

---

Request reason:

Hello. 1. The ISP provides me dynamic IP, you can't say I am socking. 2. I have been tried to discuss with them in AN, such as [1] 3. To be fair, you should block CommInt'l also. The previous edit warring with Liuxinyu970226 has ended when I provided explanation in AN on 4 November 2018. But CommInt'l suddenly restarted the edit war on 06:05, 6 November 2018. He never discussed in AN about the Wikidata page, anytime before and during the edit war. He just requested the block to protect his wrong version. CommInt'l is responsible for the edit war. It is unfair that only me being punished, as I have truly participated in the discussion.

Decline reason:

The block has meanwhile expired, so there is no need to keep up this unblock request. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

---

беларуская (тарашкевіца) | български | čeština | Deutsch | English | español | français | македонски | Nederlands | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenščina | svenska | 中文 | +/−

• You have been warring against User:Liuxinyu970226 for a long time. In WD:AN, Liu and 117.13ip and me support "the Port Area is administrated by Shenzhen, since 4 September 2018." Don't memorize the good old days. CommInt'l (talk) 17:23, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Please refer to the actual definition of Property P131: "located in the administrative territorial entity". In AN, I have provided lots of evidence to support my edits, such as [2] and [3]. It is crystal clear that the Port Area is still located in the Hong Kong Special Admistrative Region although it has given up some legal jurisdiction. 223.17.64.233 17:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

• Accidentally, it was me who suggested this property many years ago. When your block expires, or when another administrator decides to unblock you, please continue discussing ate issue at the Project Chat/ AN and/or at the talk pages, but do not engage into edit-warring.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:40, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

• The location is in Hong Kong (already said in WD). But the location is now administrated by Shenzhen Port Office, Shenzhen Immigration Office and Shenzhen Customs. CommInt'l (talk) 17:44, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The definition of location (P276) that you use is "location of the item". "In case of an administrative entity use P131." We agreed the Port Area is still located in Hong Kong Special Admistrative Region. That means P131 should be Hong Kong. @Ymblanter: Could you suggest anybody who have genuine legal knowledge to participate in the discussion? 223.17.64.233 17:54, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

29 November

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikidata, you may be blocked from editing. 117.14.243.104 08:16, 29 November 2018 (UTC)