User talk:Leostamp

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Leostamp, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed.

Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source. If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. JarrahTree 11:37, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Jagmeet Kahlon[edit]

Hello, Leostamp. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jagmeet Kahlon".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. » Shadowowl | talk 12:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:42, 28 June 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have been labelled as "a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy". No evidence was provided against me violating any policies on Wikipedia and was just blocked without any explanations or giving me a chance to defend myself. Absolutely shocked. Leostamp (talk) 11:34, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have a chance to defend yourself. This is literally what the unblock requests are for, so I encourage you to do so. Yamla (talk) 11:47, 28 June 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

"You have a chance to defend yourself" you just declined me before letting me have my say."Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not" I would love to know for what "illegitimate reasons" I used my account for? Leostamp (talk) 12:21, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not an unblock request - and the unblock template is not intended to be used to make conversation. Please review the guide to appealing blocks before using the unblock template again. SQL ^{Query me!} 22:08, 28 June 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.

Could you clarify whether you have multiple accounts? If so, what are their names? PhilKnight (talk) 20:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is my only account I have used on Wikipedia ever but stopped using it as I didn't know what useful Wikipedia edits I could make to contribute here on Wikipedia as I am still in the learning stage. Leostamp (talk) 02:29, 29 June 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

I believe I have done nothing wrong and will continue to follow Wikipedia policies. Unblocking me will give me a chance to start contributing back on Wikipedia as I am still learning what useful edits I can make for this community. Leostamp (talk) 02:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have to explain your connection to several other accounts (see Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Raj_vin.) Vanjagenije (talk) 00:39, 2 July 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

There is no connection with me and the 3 other accounts mentioned. You are trying to create a connection that doesn't exist. I am not responsible for the actions of others and will I stay firm on my response. Leostamp (talk) 07:04, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

A checkuser has verified that these accounts are the same. I am revoking your access to edit this page as well. SQL ^{Query me!} 22:31, 2 July 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.