User talk:Mr. Seth

May 2017[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Little Equinunk Bridge a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Kellams Bridge. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:23, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Norwell, Massachusetts. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Uncle Roy (talk) 04:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I don't know why I have been blocked. None of my edits were vandalism that I am aware. I did make one humorous edit to WannaCry ransomware attack, but that hardly counts as vandalism IMHO.

Decline reason:

Really? You don't think blanking an article counts as vandalism? Maybe we should extend the block, then. Yamla (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2017 (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.