User talk:Itsgregory

Your draft article, Draft:Public Law 838

Hello, Itsgregory. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Public Law 838".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:22, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. MER-C 20:15, 4 April 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

What does "redirect without leaving a redirect" even mean? There is nothing wrong with the entry as far as I can see and certainly no reason to block me; how on earth would my history indicate I am spamming?

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. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:43, 5 April 2019 (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.

Re: "redirect without leaving a redirect", I presume you refer to "Move [source page] over a redirect without leaving a redirect". What that means is the destination page was previously a redirect and the move replaced it with the source page (ie the source page was moved over it), and that no new redirect was made from the source page to the destination page. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:33, 4 April 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Upon reviewing the guide to appealing blocks and reading the explanation provided regarding redirects, I understand the issue and will make sure to avoid issues with source to destination redirects in the future. My intent is to add to the community by providing clear, accurate information, not covert advertising and will make sure this is apparent.

Decline reason:

Declined due to sockpuppetry. Yamla (talk) 13:52, 25 April 2019 (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 fixed your unblock request. You need to copy the text as it appears when viewing the page and not as it appears while editing the page, and you should add it to the bottom of your talk page underneath other comments on a new, separate line. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 17:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Bri.public (talk) 20:01, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gghenn2. Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]