User talk:Bbcody

December 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Juvaini has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; 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. Thank you. Mygerardromance (talk) 18:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're not welcome

-ME

The recent edit you made to Tooth fairy constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Mifter (talk) 18:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:Mygerardromance. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 18:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:Mygerardromance. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 18:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the revert, please disregard these warnings. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 18:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block

I can't see any useful edits from your account, so it's been blocked indefinitely. This means you are no longer allowed to edit Wikipedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HELP! I already got warned and stopped and this guy blocked me, you don't go from a warning to blocking me when i didn't do anything else!! Ask Mygerardromance

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

72.28.54.173 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Bbcody". The reason given for Bbcody's block is: "Vandalism-only account".

Blocking administrator: Ryulong (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: No need to unblock; you don't need two accounts. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said I would stop and help ask Mygerardromance. I stopped when I was warned and then Ryulong blocked me even though I didn't edit anything else!

I don't believe that this block is fair. I had discussed Bbcody's vandalism with him and he has agreed to stop vandalizing. He has not vandalized since and he hasn't received a fair amount of warnings to be blocked. Please do not block this user, it is not fair. Mygerardromance (talk) 22:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mygerardromance you've got to help me!

Don't worry, I just posted on the Administrators noticeboard to look into the situation and help you out. This just isn't fair. Mygerardromance (talk) 22:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mygerardromance, when I look at the exchange between you on your talk page, I see a disruptive kid messing about, not a potentially useful editor expressing a sincere desire to make the encyclopedia better. Is there somewhere specific I can look to see evidence that this user is interested in participating usefully at Wikipedia, or that she is even able to do so? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point, and no that is the only spot where we had discussed or he/she had discussed their remorse. I have faith in Bbcody, and I don't think this is right. I am willing to put myself up to the chopping block for them. If it were possible that he were unblocked then I would be willing to also be banned if he had vandalized again, otherwise I don't see the point in staying on wikipedia. Mygerardromance (talk) 23:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there is. I used to be user Bcody and did edit different articles of my interest, but I stopped once most of my stuff was deleted based on another person's opinion, no real reasons. So I did edit and add information and I want to now. bcody (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That makes it simpler. There's no reason for you to need two accounts, so I'll leave this one blocked; you should continue using your primary account if you want to make constructive edits. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped using that one about a year ago, and opened this one because the other one is deleted and i no longer have the password for it. Besides, once I was warned I stopped, so why was i blocked after that? That isn't fair. Mygerardromance this isn't fair I said I would stop and I did you've got to help

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).

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

Request reason:

I read the thing that goes with this saying abusing appeals will not help and I don't think I am but once I was warned I stopped vandalising and after that being blocked seams unfair so please unblock me so I can start editing.

Decline reason:

It seems that you only came back to vandalise. I don't see any benefit to Wikipedia in allowing you to continue editing. — Kevin (talk) 00:27, 15 December 2008 (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 stopped after the warnings didn't I? And I want to edit and add information bcody (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to consider an example of what you are thinking of adding before you go at it again. Your history of "additions" are not supportive. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well can I be unblocked so I can edit at all? I mean why would I want to be unblocked at all if I didn't want to edit? Because if I vandalized then you could just block me again.bcody (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you've been editing Wikipedia for some time, i think what the previous editor was asking for was a few diffs of your most useful contributions if you decide to request unblock again. The evidence we have does indicate that you're only interested in vandalizing, and some evidence that you are interested in writing an encyclopedia would be helpful. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well look back at what I did before in my old account, which I can no longer access, and you'll see that I added to several articles, started one article, and left because stuff I added to the articles on Blackbeard and JAWS were taken away for no reason other than someone else's opinion, and they were no higher up than me. bcody (talk) 02:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, everything we edit on Wikipedia is open to changes by other people. Every time you click "save page," you see a message that says, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." If you return to editing, I can guarantee that it'll happen again, many, many times. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I'll be more specific. If your goal is to come to back to "add information" like tents can seat either ten people 'or a really fat person', 'Toga toga', calling Trembley a 'left'-hand man, the name "La nintendo" to a serious article about a smaller Laotian language, that Dirnbach played "reindeer" games, don't even bother. You aren't going to get unblocked, until you show some sign of improvement. Can you give us a specific edit you want done as an example? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you can see the edits from your old account here. Honestly, though, pointing to a few edits over 18 months ago isn't likely to change any minds. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You asked for evidence and there it is. I aslo stopped after the warnings so you have that too and there's nothing else I can tell you. bcody (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

I stopped making edits once I was warned twice, I didn't do anything else but was still blocked. I would like to be unblocked so I can add information to articles that I know.

Decline reason:

That still does not tell us what, if anything, constructive you would do if unblocked. Page protected for abuse of the unblock process. — Sandstein 22:48, 17 December 2008 (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.