User talk:Club-pedia

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Club-pedia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 03:05, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to The Solitude of Prime Numbers (novel) has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: The Solitude of Prime Numbers (novel) was changed by Club-pedia (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.917786 on 2017-02-08T03:01:34+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:01, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Robot (disambiguation)[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you removed some content from Robot (disambiguation) 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! Dan Koehl (talk) 02:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Dan Koehl. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to User:Dan_Koehl/Status— because it did not appear constructive. 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. Thanks. Dan Koehl (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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) 02:42, 24 February 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

should of you just blocked me for a little bit not forever? please set a expire date plus it was a mistake I did not do it on purposeClub-pedia (talk) 02:22, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There was no mistake. You were doing it on purpose. An indefinite block is appropriate. Yamla (talk) 12:46, 28 February 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Plus I seen other people vanlsiding other people talk pages and they get warnings or a block with a expire date not permeant blocks so what is up with that?? Plus i did not mean to do it so please give me a another chance.Club-pedia (talk) 02:07, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

To be unblocked, you will need to demonstrate that you know what you did wrong and that you will not do it again in the future. Accordingly, if you want to make another unblock request, you will need to address specifically what you did wrong and give examples of constructive edits you'll make in the future. —C.Fred (talk) 02:36, 1 March 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

fine I was gonna add something useful to his talk page but then the page got sumbited and then wrote offline i was going to change back but then it reloaded so then I got blocked I will do apposritae edits to articles that need help so PLEASE unblock me Club-pedia (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2017 (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. PhilKnight (talk) 00:17, 5 March 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.

For any further reviews, please note attempted block evasion at User talk:72.235.108.54. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:13, 5 March 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Ok i know why I was blocked because I did vandalism i very sorry for that and I will not continue to cause damage and disruptions and I PROMISE YOU I will make useful contributions instead and if i don't do what ever you want. SO PLEASE UNBLOCK MEClub-pedia (talk) 02:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Persistent block evasion. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:14, 7 March 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.

Don't do things like this please, and do not remove declined unblock requests while you are still blocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why

Evading your block (and on my talk page) does not generally help your unblock request. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:04, 7 March 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Ok i know why I was blocked because I did vandalism i very sorry for that and I will not continue to cause damage and disruptions and I PROMISE YOU I will make useful contributions instead and if i don't do what ever you want. SO PLEASE UNBLOCK MEClub-pedia (talk) 01:20, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The disruptive editing extends far beyond mere vandalism. You must present a much stronger case demonstrating that you understand how your editing has been problematic, including block evasion and refactoring the comments of others (on an unblock request, no less!). Saying "I won't do it again" is not very convincing, it would be better if you demonstrated what positive contributions you would like to make going forward. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:21, 8 March 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.

?????????? What is block evasion and plus Was only asking a question [redacted] and I don't know how wikepida works

"I don't know how wikipedia works" is not a valid defence. Frankly, competence is required. If you can't follow the rules, or if you won't follow the rules, then you may not edit. One of the rules is, when you're blocked, you can't edit: not with this account, not with any other account, not while not logged in. That's what "block evasion" is, and that's what has you in big(ger) trouble now. —C.Fred (talk) 02:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

?????????????? What is competence?

Talk Page Editing Privileges[edit]

I have revoked your talk page editing rights as a consequence of your vexatious and frivolous block appeals. If you are unsure what any of these words mean Google can provide you with links to a dictionary. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:05, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]