User talk:Johnlemartirao

Welcome!

Hello, Johnlemartirao, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 15:30, 10 July 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).

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

Request reason:

If you still did not convinced that I will never do that again, better to delete this username

Decline reason:

I can't see an actual request for an unblock here (see WP:GAB for pointers). We can't delete usernames, by the way. ➲ redvers ^{sit down next to me} 11:07, 26 February 2009 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

(no reason)

Decline reason:

No reason was given. Please note that repeatedly making non-requests like this can get your block modified to prevent you from editing this page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:02, 1 March 2009 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Sorry, I forgot to insert reason. I was just experimenting the template, and from now on, I promise I never do that again straight from my heart.

Decline reason:

And yet you still haven't given a reason. Either give a valid reason so it can be assessed properly, or stop pissing about Jac16888 ^Talk 15:15, 1 March 2009 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I was just experimenting the block template to those some IP addresses that ruin others' articles, and in fact, I really don't know who should use that block template, which is for administrator use only. I used the template block for those IP addresses that do unnecessary and insane edits to good articles, and I do not know that Wikipedia administrators have the sole right to use this template. So I am requesting for an unblock, and my blocked experience will serve as a rule that I should never do disruptive editing over and over again (I am sorry for the grammar, I have English difficulties)

Decline reason:

If your English is that bad that you think it may be reasonable to give the {{spamusername}} template to an unregistered user, who isn't blocked, then you shouldn't be editing English Wikipedia. Wikipedia exists in several languages - if you have trouble finding your language, ask for help using the {{helpme}} template. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:52, 1 March 2009 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I was just experimenting the block template to those some IP addresses that ruin others' articles, and in fact, I really don't know who should use that block template, which is for administrator use only. I used the template block for those IP addresses that do unnecessary and insane edits to good articles, and I do not know that Wikipedia administrators have the sole right to use this template. So I am requesting for an unblock, and my blocked experience will serve as a rule that I should never do disruptive editing over and over again (I am sorry for the grammar, I have English difficulties) For my English grammar, I am asking for pardon for my poor English right now, not on the entire Wikipedia. I am appealing for unblocking my user account because I really do not know that administrators are the people who have the right to use that template. Thanks for all of you, God bless.

Decline reason:

Not willing to unblock a user who has removed the block notice and not restored it. This is the last unblock; I'm protecting the page now. Daniel Case (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2009 (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.

Please carefully read the block notice you were given, which you removed in this edit. You were blocked not only for putting invalid block notices on user talk pages, but also for a longstanding pattern of disruptive editing. Many editors have approached you about problematic edits in the past, but you were unresponsive. We have many editors who are not native English speakers, and everyone makes mistakes, but you need to stop simply experimenting, and instead make an effort to learn about things first. When others point out a mistake that you have made, you need to respond in a way that makes it clear that you understand your error and will not repeat it. I encourage you to reread my recent post and explain your actions. Maralia (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. It is however, I do not know how to respond your help. But I am truly grateful with it. It just so happen I really do not know that admin people are the one who have the right to use these templates, and from this expoerince I know now my limit as a Wikipedia contributor. From this now on, I promise that I will read all things first before doing edits, so that I may become a part of Wikipedia community making things good not bad. I thank you for your effort of helping me. If my account will be unblocked, I promise that I will not make these nuisance like I did before.

P.S. I cannot respond to your talk page, so I explained my point here.--Johnlemartirao (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of University of the Philippines, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article University of the Philippines, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of the Philippines, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KDS4444 (talk) 06:34, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of University of the Philippines College of Arts and Letters

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on University of the Philippines College of Arts and Letters, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. KDS4444 (talk) 08:02, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]