User talk:The Cheeky Little Blighter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm DMacks. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Nitrate 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! DMacks (talk) 19:21, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Adele are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:28, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please reread the above. Wikipedia is not a place to discuss fan mail. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Talk:Cheryl Cole shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Favonian (talk) 19:42, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:Cheryl Cole. MarnetteD|Talk 19:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon
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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:58, 9 July 2014 (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).

The Cheeky Little Blighter (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have always been interested in editing wikipedia but was always put off by a friend who told me the admins close rank and pick on new users. I also read many reports of these by former users. However, I thought I would give it a go. After creating my account I read the rules and found that talk pages should be used to discuss content before it was edited. I could have made the changes myself but wanted to discuss them with other users. When I first used the TALKPAGE, I asked a question which was deemed to be forum like and should not have asked on the TALKPAGE and I accepted this. When reading a question, one user had made a section saying 'What eye colour does she have.' I responded to this by saying that she had brown eyes, as can be seen by looking at a picture. I was then told that this was not suitable for the TALKPAGE. It was at this point that I became quite annoyed. When I asked the user who removed my answer why this wasn't suitable and yet the question was, he simply called my a troll and deleted my comment. When I asked why it was ok to ask a question, but no ok to give the correct answer, another admin got involved and 8 was blocked. I will not hold my breath on is block being successful having read your blocking policy. I think it is a shame that a good informative website like this which has the slogan 'anyone can edit' is controlled by some busy bodies who in fact do not want everyone to edit and contribute. Before I sign off I leave you with this: If I ask you want day it is and you say Wednesday, who can answering the question not be relevant but the question itself is relevant. The Cheeky Little Blighter (talk) 9:10 pm, Yesterday (UTC+1)

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. Yunshui 雲水 08:31, 10 July 2014 (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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Cheeky_Little_Blighter&oldid=1077935482"