User talk:Hobble McSmee

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent edits do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Mat ty.007 17:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm Jprg1966. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Andrew Schauble 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! Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jprg1966. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Patterned ground, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Pârâul Stânei (Ghimbav)

I reverted your edit as I believe that it wasn't needed. Thank you! Mat ty.007 16:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dave Jones (politician) with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 was changed by Hobble McSmee (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.950193 on 2014-01-06T17:20:52+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 17:20, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly advice

Hi Hobble, edits like these aren't helpful to anyone. If you want help, why not go to the Teahouse, where you can ask questions about editing Wikipedia to editors, or place {{help me}} on your userpage. Disrupting Wikipedia isn't fun for those who have to clean it up, but for you, you will be blocked if you continue, which isn't what anyone wants. Why not give constructive editing a try? Feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Best wishes, Mat ty.007 17:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to The Notebook (novel) has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: The Notebook (novel) was changed by Hobble McSmee (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.928989 on 2014-01-09T13:11:01+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sense and Sensibility. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Sense and Sensibility was changed by Hobble McSmee (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.939592 on 2014-01-09T13:11:04+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Four Weddings and a Funeral, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Four Weddings and a Funeral was changed by Hobble McSmee (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.899122 on 2014-01-09T13:11:09+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Bridget Jones's Diary, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Bridget Jones's Diary was changed by Hobble McSmee (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.898323 on 2014-01-09T13:11:17+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Wembach (Gersprenz), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Ninney (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. 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. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing my block

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).

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

Request reason:

What do you wanna know? Am I sorry for what I did? There's not a day goes by I don't feel regret. Not because I'm in here, or because you think I should. I look back on the way I was then, a young, stupid kid who committed that terrible crime. I wanna talk to him. I wanna try to talk some sense to him -- tell him the way things are. But I can't. That kid's long gone and this old man is all that's left. I gotta live with that. So you go on and stamp your form, sonny, and stop wasting my time. Because to tell you the truth, I don't give a shit.Hobble McSmee (talk) 13:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're still a kid; certainly behaviourally. I can see no reason to unblock. Ged UK 13:52, 9 January 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'll leave it to another admin to decline this request, but since quoting The Shawshank Redemption is pretty much as far from a valid appeal as you can get, I've removed your talkpage access. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:43, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]