User talk:Romaniist

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Graham87 (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing pattern is highly suspicious and several of your edits have been disruptive. Graham87 (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I'm sorry, but I don't understand how I've been disruptive or been suspicious. I understand I how I may have caused some issue but I do not intend on vandalism and have just added links & edited grammatical errors. I can understand the concern of seeing a new user quickly editing pages, but this is far from my intent and I do not wish at all to cause any disruption. :3 chwist is kwing ^_^ (talk) 15:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I won't explain any further unless asked to do so by an admin but your response in some ways just further proves that you're not suited to editing Wikipedia. Too many things just don't add up here. Graham87 (talk) 15:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do my responses disprove competence? I genuinely cannot understand, if there were legitimate reasons such as inappropriate edits that would make sense, but all I have done is add links relating to what was being described.

Please re-evaluate and understand I've given my appeal and my explanation, this response seems arrogant and dismissive and I would like it at least if a better/clearer reason was given rather than "your response in some ways just further proves that you're not suited to editing Wikipedia." :3 chwist is kwing ^_^ (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Hello, from what I have read, I have been blocked on the basis of disruptive editing, as well as a supposed suspicious editing. I sincerely apologise for this as a result, I in no way intended to disrupt contributions nor cause any harm, and I apologize that I have caused any.

I also wish to apologize for the supposed "Suspicious editing consistency" which I have raised, I was unaware of this and I am deeply sorry of raising suspicion and will try my best to make my editing "less suspicious." (If any advice can be given on how to do so please inform me.)

In the future, I promise to try & learn more on how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia in a better manner, ensuring that I learn the respective guides and information on how to edit without potentially disrupting. I would moderators also like to understand that I am extremely new to editing, and have caused errors likely due to my excitement and lack of knowledge.

I hope you understand however that I in no way wish to cause harm, nor disrupt, and I sincerely apologise for my actions, and hope I may be unblocked and pardoned.

Thank you.

:3 chwist is kwing ^_^ (talk) 21:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Hello, from what I have read, I have been blocked on the basis of disruptive editing, as well as a supposed suspicious editing. I sincerely apologise for this as a result, I in no way intended to disrupt contributions nor cause any harm, and I apologize that I have caused any. 

I also wish to apologize for the supposed "Suspicious editing consistency" which I have raised, I was unaware of this and I am deeply sorry of raising suspicion and will try my best to make my editing "less suspicious." (If any advice can be given on how to do so please inform me.)

In the future, I promise to try & learn more on how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia in a better manner, ensuring that I learn the respective guides and information on how to edit without potentially disrupting. I would moderators also like to understand that I am extremely new to editing, and have caused errors likely due to my excitement and lack of knowledge.

I hope you understand however that I in no way wish to cause harm, nor disrupt, and I sincerely apologise for my actions, and hope I may be unblocked and pardoned.

Thank you.
[[User:Romaniist|:3 chwist is kwing ^_^]] ([[User talk:Romaniist#top|talk]]) 21:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello, from what I have read, I have been blocked on the basis of disruptive editing, as well as a supposed suspicious editing. I sincerely apologise for this as a result, I in no way intended to disrupt contributions nor cause any harm, and I apologize that I have caused any. 

I also wish to apologize for the supposed "Suspicious editing consistency" which I have raised, I was unaware of this and I am deeply sorry of raising suspicion and will try my best to make my editing "less suspicious." (If any advice can be given on how to do so please inform me.)

In the future, I promise to try & learn more on how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia in a better manner, ensuring that I learn the respective guides and information on how to edit without potentially disrupting. I would moderators also like to understand that I am extremely new to editing, and have caused errors likely due to my excitement and lack of knowledge.

I hope you understand however that I in no way wish to cause harm, nor disrupt, and I sincerely apologise for my actions, and hope I may be unblocked and pardoned.

Thank you.
[[User:Romaniist|:3 chwist is kwing ^_^]] ([[User talk:Romaniist#top|talk]]) 21:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello, from what I have read, I have been blocked on the basis of disruptive editing, as well as a supposed suspicious editing. I sincerely apologise for this as a result, I in no way intended to disrupt contributions nor cause any harm, and I apologize that I have caused any. 

I also wish to apologize for the supposed "Suspicious editing consistency" which I have raised, I was unaware of this and I am deeply sorry of raising suspicion and will try my best to make my editing "less suspicious." (If any advice can be given on how to do so please inform me.)

In the future, I promise to try & learn more on how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia in a better manner, ensuring that I learn the respective guides and information on how to edit without potentially disrupting. I would moderators also like to understand that I am extremely new to editing, and have caused errors likely due to my excitement and lack of knowledge.

I hope you understand however that I in no way wish to cause harm, nor disrupt, and I sincerely apologise for my actions, and hope I may be unblocked and pardoned.

Thank you.
[[User:Romaniist|:3 chwist is kwing ^_^]] ([[User talk:Romaniist#top|talk]]) 21:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

.

Anyone evaluating this request should note that the edit that added it also removed a previous conversation involving me on this talk page. The ridiculous signature (especially since most of the world's population isn't Christian) is only one of a long long line of issues with this user in their short career with this account. Graham87 (talk) 06:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morning (Atleast here), considering you wish for me to remove my signature I have done so, replacing it with just my user for convenience. I will also be reinstalling the prior conversation as you have asked, and I am sorry for any problems it caused. Romaniist (talk) 10:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but you can't change your old signatures retroactively (it loses the context of the conversation). I think the fact that you even thought that such a signature was appropriate doesn't reflect well on you at all. May I ask, what were your plans for this account in the medium-to-long term? More directly, what were you planning to do when you discovered you were blocked? And how did you not know that "favorite" was American English? The combination of extreme maturity and extreme immaturity in this account's history is ... more than a little interesting. Graham87 (talk) 11:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I wanted to contribute to Wikipedia on a small scale in which it would largely be grammatical errors & adding the relevant links to other articles, I essentially planned on contributing on a small but hopefully meaningful scale. In regards to the question of "planning to do when I discovered I was blocked," I felt saddened by this, however my plan was to simply understand why I had been blocked & resolve the reason as to why.

I also am sorry for not using the correct American English typically used, I am still trying to adjust to the changes but I promise I shall try and change my grammar to fit that of the site as I am quite new to both using American English & editing. Romaniist (talk) 11:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The variety of English used depends on the article; for someone associated primarily with with one English-speaking country, use the variety of English from that country; otherwise, use the one adopted by the first major editor to the article. Something just ... doesn't add up with you still ... I'm not comfortable with unblocking and I'm not sure what would assuage my discomfort. Graham87 (talk) 12:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]