User talk:Ford Taurus

February 2014

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at SRT Viper. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:38, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chevrolet SS Sedan

Please introduce some content to Chevrolet SS Sedan. Thank you for your contributions. --BiH (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of fastest production cars by acceleration

There is no point in adding categories for values obtained from such sources as owner uploaded youtube vieos, blog postings, etc. Theyn are not wp:reliable sources. Meters (talk) 06:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of fastest production cars by acceleration ‎. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Meters (talk) 20:10, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at List of fastest production cars by acceleration, you may be blocked from editing. It seems clear to me that you are now intentionally messing this article up. Meters (talk) 19:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Green Valley Produce Market

Hello Ford Taurus,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Green Valley Produce Market for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Knyzna1 (talk) 13:21, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Green Valley Produce Market

Hi Ford

The reason for deletion was based purely on notability (see WP:A7). If there were to be an article for every specialty grocery store in the world it would not be practical (this is described as "run of the mill"). Also, the wording seemed to portray the topic in a manner with close proximity to advertising. I am sorry if I caused you any inconvenience or offence by nominating the article for speedy deletion. Knyzna1 (talk) 17:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per that thread, cut it out. Further trolling will result in a block. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:43, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I apologized. Ford Taurus (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ford Taurus, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Ish dar ian 20:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Clearly not here to contribute to building the encyclopedia. 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. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 07:25, 6 March 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).

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

Request reason:

I wasn't trying to vandalize Wikipedia. I was doing constructive edits to GMC and GNC, stating that they're not to be confused with GNC and GMC. I need assistance, please. Ford Taurus (talk) 17:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There's no evidence you're here to contribute productively and without causing significant difficulties for other users. Your behaviour at the recent WP:ANI thread shows little regard for your fellow editors or the concerns they have raised. No unblock will even be contemplated until you address the concerns raised elsewhere and demonstrate how it is safe and sensible to unblock you. Nick (talk) 18:03, 6 March 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.

I see above that you apologized for trolling, then went on to make this trolling edit. I anticipate that you will argue it was sincere, but no one is going to buy that. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:42, 6 March 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).

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

Request reason:

I'm very sorry, my friend. The concerns will be raised elsewhere, but I'm only a 3 year old baby, so, I don't know any better. My mommy and daddy wants me unblocked. Ford Taurus (talk) 19:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your ability to edit your talk page is being thrown out with the bathwater. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:49, 6 March 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.

I didn't block you for the last two edits but for the edits and comments prior to that. Also I'm not replying to the email. Given the way you have behaved I don't need you knowing that. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]