User talk:Mali1702

Ping me when replying by adding {{Ping|Mali1702}} at the start of your reply, sign with four tildes (~~~~), and save both at the same time.

To leave a new message
Please click here to start a new section. Remember to sign your post with four tildes (~~~~). Thank you!

If you revert my edit
It would be nice if you left a message here if you revert my edit, as explaining why you did so. Thanks!

February 2017[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Operation Ouch! 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: Operation Ouch! was changed by Mali1702 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.909399 on 2017-02-22T10:37:17+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mali1702, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Mali1702! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Unblock Appeal[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).

Mali1702 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Legitimate editing. --Mali1702 ^Talk _Contribs 01:13, 10 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. Huon (talk) 01:25, 10 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).

Mali1702 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Seriously, legitimate editing on how to improve an article. --Mali1702 ^Talk _Contribs 09:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Again, this does not address the reason for the block. Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:38, 10 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).

Mali1702 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Seriously, I did not make any of those edits you suspected. Nope, only legitimate editing on how to improve an article. --Mali1702 ^Talk _Contribs 20:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your edit history seems to say differently. Also you're clearly duplicating edits on another blocked IP. At this point, this is disruptive and you could lose access to your talk page. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:17, 10 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.

As a note to any admins coming to review this request, please note that he is just copy/pasting his previous unblock attempts from his previous sock here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:108.66.232.14 --Tarage (talk) 21:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch. I revoked talk page access here. --Yamla (talk) 21:19, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]