User talk:Seunghwane

March 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page User talk:Xbcj0843hck3 has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Mike moral ♪♫ 00:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page User talk:Xbcj0843hck3. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:Xbcj0843hck3. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:Xbcj0843hck3. Nascar 1996 00:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:32, 13 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Why am I being blocked? I was simply deleting my user discussion page so that I don't have a petty argument on my user history page anymore

Decline reason:

See discussion below, your new account is not blocked, only the old one is blocked. Why do you want this account (which should now not be used any more) unblocked? Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:02, 14 March 2010 (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.

I've asked the blocking admin to take another look. It seems to me that you did nothing wrong and it was all a misunderstanding. Tim Song (talk) 19:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you requested a username change - it was granted, and your userpage and usertalk page were both moved to your new account. As of that point, you should have abandoned this account - your original concern was related to privacy. However, you have logged into it and edited - re-exposing yourself to whichever concerns you had. Which account do you want - this one, or Xbcj0843hck3 ... make a decision and stick to it (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:16, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason you were blocked was that you kept deleting material from another user's talk page - there was no explanation (the edit summary was always left blank), hence it appeared to be gross vandalism, and as you never replied to any of the warnings, they just piled up, hence at No.5 - the block goes on. As BWilkins points out, by doing so you have now shown the community that these two accounts are one person, so any element of privacy has been lost. According to the logs this was your old account, so I don't see a reason to unblock it. The logs show that Xbcj0843hck3 is not blocked. You are not going to be logging into two accounts? Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]