User talk:ClamshellThoractomy

January 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm Cannolis. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Stuarts Draft High School, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Cannolis (talk) 20:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Stuarts Draft High School. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Cannolis (talk) 21:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Shenandoah Valley Governor's School, you may be blocked from editing. ... discospinster _talk 00:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Stuarts Draft High School. Cannolis (talk) 02:33, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me how exactly I am "vandalizing." I am adding facts that enrich this Wikipedia page. What makes you think you have the authority to block me? ClamshellThoractomy (talk) 02:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)ClamshellThorctomy[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ... discospinster _talk 03:02, 29 January 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

No justification ClamshellThoractomy (talk) 03:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

When an editor responds to helpful suggestsion with personal attacks, a block is absolutely justified. —C.Fred (talk) 04:57, 29 January 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

What "personal attacks"? I need more specific details and proof of what I did wrong. ClamshellThoractomy (talk) 16:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The link is given above. If you don't consider "Let's talk about how insufferable <redacted> is" to be a personal attack, you will not be unblocked. — Voice of Clam 16:45, 29 January 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Those "personal attacks" were completely warranted. The person in question insulted me first by saying I didn't know how to source (which I do) and then told me I needed to read in a very rude comment left. So maybe HE should be blocked instead of me. ClamshellThoractomy (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Between the vandalism, the personal attacks, and the continued pointless unblock requests, I don't think this is going anywhere. Talk page access revoked. --Blablubbs (talk) 17:55, 29 January 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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

--Blablubbs (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #54071[edit]

is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]