User talk:Marioguy

Speedy deletion of "Pakistanian"

Pakistanian, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is vandalism.

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Cyborg (comics) with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:56, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistanian

Since the article has been deleted, no one except administrators can see what it said. My reply to your message will be based on my memory, not on the article, but I think my memory is good and the following logically must describe what why the deletion was made. My recollection is that the article you wrote portrayed "Pakistanian" as a fact, not a joke or mistake inadvertently (or not) created in comics. Adding to the problem, it was inserted into at least one other article as a fact. If you had written it along the lines of the newspaper article and cited that article, reviewing administrators might have allowed it to stay, whether or not I had tagged it - which I probably would not have done. That being said, this topic probably would fit better in an article about DC Comics, or the particular volume if there is one, as a separate section. Please realize that at least one administrator reviewed this and deleted it, I only pointed it out. Donner60 (talk) 03:49, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block 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 ~~~~}}. —Kusma (t·c) 06:21, 29 January 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am here to build an encyclopedia. Marioguy (talk) 20:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Repeatedly making dumb references to a comic book mistake is not part of the encyclopedia we're trying to build. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:25, 29 January 2016 (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.

February 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, you may be blocked from editing. I will remove your ability to edit this talk page if you do this again. —Kusma (t·c) 09:10, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

—Kusma (t·c) 09:00, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]