User talk:ChuVanCrane

Recent edit to Vietnam national football team

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you removed some content from Vietnam national football team without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 09:47, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request by ChuVanCrane

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).

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

Request reason:

Reasons? Why is my account blocked and accused of sock? Is there no precaution as to why any account would be blocked? Why do i get blocked and also get certain edits reverted and others don't get blocked while making the same amount of content change? ChuVanCrane (talk) 12:43, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 12:59, 26 December 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.

Another request by ChuVanCrane

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).

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

Request reason:

I can affirm that this block is not necessary to prevent vandalism with regards to the account that had been created. It's newly created to make useful contributions and legit suggestions but get blocked from rushing for "sweeping changes" while in when I'm still confused and was debating about the general vague guidelines of removing "large" content (by whose definition?).This IP is also recently manipulated and used by other users. I understand that I have been blocked for warring edit, abusive and disruptive editing and also socking but it is of accident occurred by IP users that is not concurring one another. This won't happen again as long as I has reauthorized and secure private utilization of this IP address. For conflict in editing, there has been disagreements and and arguments between editors from this IP, including me and other topic uninterested editors due to the articles content and the vague editing guidelines of wiki itself hence making unintended provocative edits. This will be settled as soon as I'm a new editor and just somewhat understand how to make rather more gradual editing process and rather experiments or resorting to the talk page for relevant debate.This request is serious so as I can continue raising the questions and make some points about these editing issues, also debating without running into editing conflicts. Please consider this request. ChuVanCrane (talk) 00:40, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed sock puppetry. Talk page access revoked to prevent further time wasting. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:50, 27 December 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.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #23662 was submitted on Dec 27, 2018 09:04:36. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 09:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]