This IP address is currently blocked.
The latest block log entry is provided below for reference:
06:15, 30 September 2023ST47talkcontribs changed block settings for 78.47.0.0/16talk with an expiration time of 3 years (account creation blocked) (((webhostblock)) <!-- Hetzner Online GmbH (HETZNER-AS, DE, AS24940) -->)
This IP address is currently globally blocked.
If the block is marked as locally disabled, this means that it applies on other sites, but a local administrator has decided to disable it on this wiki.
The global block log entry is provided below for reference:
02:2402:24, 28 October 2018diffhist+567
Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi 78.47.72.231 (talk)
Undid revision 865925500 by Octoberwoodland (talk) I've read the article: The 9/11 Widow is not making anything but proper references to the actual Criminal Murders of thousands, and providing verifable information about the involvement of an co-conspirators, as has been alleged in the litigation by the Families, as has been supported by Justice. No consensus required your Conspiracy Theories, 9/11 did not happen? - CRAZY!Tag: Undo
27 October 2018
02:2502:25, 27 October 2018diffhist+567
Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi 78.47.72.155 (talk)
Undid revision 865920093 by DBigXray (talk) Reliable source is 9/11 widow who references Khashoggi's articles directly, as well as recent Department of Justice actions since October 16. Read the entirety of the article; no false assumptions allowed here.Tag: Undo
03:1303:13, 20 October 2018diffhist+783
2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries 78.47.72.227 (talk)
Undid revision 864876306 by C.Fred (talk) The repeated reversions by Vrifals are suspiciously non-sensical and totally harassing. Does not understand what constitutes appropriate defintion of speculation; provides continual and harassing false contentions. A Letter to the Editor, responded to by the Candidate, is sufficient as a verifiable Source, and exceeds that of other references noted, which are often from unknown third-party sources.Tag: Undo
02:4102:41, 20 October 2018diffhist+783
2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries 78.47.72.227 (talk)
Undid revision 864858044 by Vrivasfl (talk) It would be advised that Vrivasfl stop. While your apology is noted, you have exhibited deficient understanding. 1) The citation/reference is to provable comments of reader Anonymous 2) Verifiable response from Candidate to the Referenced/Cited suggestion encourages such discussion, AND 3) Candidate welcomes such consideration! 4) Political background very relevant, demonstrates status validityTag: Undo
19 October 2018
23:2223:22, 19 October 2018diffhist+783
2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries 78.47.72.157 (talk)
Undid revision 864856807 by Vrivasfl (talk) People like Vrivasfl are making Wikipedia an experiment in harassment. All of his statements are false. 1) The Citation is independent of the individual. 2) Speculation has been exceeded because potential Candidate agrees with Reader. 3) Contrary to false speculation by Vrivasfl, such person does not support Trump, often criticizes him. 4) Candidate has also worked with ex Reagan Budget DirectorTag: Undo
22:4722:47, 19 October 2018diffhist+783
2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries 78.47.72.157 (talk)
Undid revision 864832568 by Vrivasfl (talk) The source itself, as per reference, provided a suggestion and prediction that ptoential candidate would run for President in 2020 and take oath of office in 2021. The potential candidate not only agreed with this suggestion, but also published this in his own diary for public knowledge of the fact. This is actual and verifiable proof that such discussion exists; and exceeds mere speculation.Tag: Undo
18 October 2018
21:4721:47, 18 October 2018diffhist+783
2020 Libertarian Party presidential primaries 78.47.72.156 (talk)
Undid revision 864681040 by Vrivasfl (talk) Commentary in email is not only indicative of definite speculation, but was also included and published as suggestion by the speculative candidate himself; further, contrary to erroneous statement by vrivasfl, this person does not support the current president in the slightest, and recognizes himself as a libertarian in the published message.Tag: Undo
21:4021:40, 2 July 2018diffhist−97
Civil marriage 78.47.144.213 (talk)
→Countries with no civil marriage: I read the reference "Between Church and State: Civil Marriage in the Arab World". It does not claim at all what the wikipedia article states. of course non-Muslim can get married but everybody only in their own community! (also if you want to evaluate how trustworthy that reference is, note that this article states that there is no civil marriage in the UK for heterosexuals, but only for homosexuals, (it mixes up civil marriage and civil union)!