User talk:$imbeio$i$

March 2018[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Honshu, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Shikoku. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing[edit]

I still have trouble adding citations $imbeio$i$ (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Honshu. The number you added was wrong, which I have corrected. I think perhaps you mathematically misused the citation you found. Be advised that competence is required to edit Wikipedia. Because your edits continually seem disruptive, further problems may result in a block. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:43, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018[edit]

The source I used is taken from Statista.com., which gives the total coastal length of all Japanese prefectures in 2014 (the total for Honshu obviously includes all prefectures located on that island). So stop accusing me of vandalism because the source is real and so are the figures, I just had trouble with correcting the reference. Thanks bye!!! $imbeio$i$ (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 19:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[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).

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

Request reason:

I absolutely do not comprehend me being blocked!! I try by all means to add constructive and reliable sources to my edits. Individuals who revert my edits are ignorant small-minded twerp who fail to do a background check on my sources' reliability and that shouldn't be made to be my problem. I love sharing new information with the world and adding trustworthy sources that supports that info goes without saying. Please consider lifting my blockage as there's nothing disruptive about my edits Kind regards $imbeio$i$ $imbeio$i$ (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You evidently forgot to read the guideline for unblock requests, specifically WP:NOTTHEM. Any more personal attacks and you will be blocked indefinitely. Favonian (talk) 20:28, 19 March 2018 (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.

Appeal for an unblock[edit]

I obviously might've missed the point on why I was blocked. I understand that it was immature on my part to minimise as much as possible my wrongdoing and I profusely apologise for the past edits that may have been vandalising. However, I need to point out that the last edit I made that got me blocked wasn't in any was vandalism because I did extensive research to ensure accuracy (please refer to the reverted edit I made at wiki. Honshu's coastline length (15398 to 10084) >reference Statista.com [a reliable source]) the reason I think (& please correct me if I'm wrong) I got blocked is because I had trouble correctly adding it to the reference list. But, in any case, hopefully my apology will go a long way to make you realise that I've thought about my mistakes and won't be repeated. Kind regards $imbeio$i$ (talk) 04:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Attapeu Province, you may be blocked from editing. Sam Sailor 09:42, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018[edit]

There were no disruptions. If you opened your eyes you would've seen that the sq.km area figures do not match (1,032 km2 vs. 10,320 km2) I was simply FIXING AN EEROR. Something you failed to have done. You dumb bum. Check pages before you spit your venom. You idiot $imbeio$i$ (talk) 17:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to San people. Shellwood (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]