User talk:Maxlewisuk

January 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits 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: Steve Robson was changed by Maxlewisuk (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.865936 on 2013-01-10T13:18:44+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Steve Robson with this edit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Make cat 13:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits 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: Steve Robson was changed by Maxlewisuk (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.850493 on 2013-01-25T14:55:13+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Steve Robson 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. Thank you. Eye snore 14:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Steve Robson, 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: Steve Robson was changed by Maxlewisuk (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.965429 on 2013-01-25T15:53:23+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Steve Robson with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Eye snore 15:56, 25 January 2013 (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 below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. De728631 (talk) 16:13, 25 January 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

My account was blocked for attempting to remove a section from Steve Robson's page (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Steve_Robson. I was asked to make some amendments to the page by Steve's manager Sarah - I can provide contact details for Sarah who will validate this if needs be. You will see that the table on the page in the discography section was added by me, this information was provided by Sarah to replace the text heavy 'Songwriting and Production' section. Once I had the table correct, I attempted to remove the now unnecessary section but have been banned. Please unban me and ideally help me to remove the section to avoid repetition

Decline reason:

In the absence of discussion and consensus, removing large sections of sourced content is considered vandalism. Since your account had made no other edits, it had the appearance of a vandalism-only account, and was properly blocked. Your request here shows what you were attempting, but does not in any way explain why you ignored the multiple warnings about your edits. Nor does it explain why you have absolutely zero edits to the article's talk page. Even in the absence of a Conflict of Interest, those factors would be troubling. In order to unblock, we need to know that you will A) edit within our policies, and B) refrain from editing this article at all, ever, due to Conflict of Interest. As noted, you can discuss proposed changes on the article's talk page if unblocked - but you need to show that you understand why your edits were problematic before you can be unblocked. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 20:54, 30 January 2013 (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.

In general, we don't allow entities or their representatives to edit their own articles. The proper thing to do in this instance is to suggest the changes on the article's discussion page and make your case to less conflicted editors there. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 19:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I understand the reason I was blocked was at the time it wasn't clear to me what I was doing wrong. I have not removed any information from the site, I have merely changed the way it is presented and then attempted to avoid repetition by removing the older information which is also out of date compared with what I added. As you can see from the 'Career' section which I have improved on and the discography, my intention is not to promote or sell Steve Robson, simply to ensure that his wikipedia page is as current and up to date as it can be. At present, there is a lot of repetition on the page, if you insist that i cannot edit it again then i will not but i urge you to look at the content of the 'songwriting and production' section and compare it with the more recent 'discography' - they cover exactly the same information but the discography i created is more concise and easier to read. It is not my intention to remove information.

Accept reason:

After discussing it with the blocking admin, I've decided to unblock you, on the condition that you do not make any edits directly to the Steve Robson page. You are, however, very welcome to suggest changes on the article's discussion page - preface your proposed alterations with {{Request edit}} so that they get attended to quickly. If you edit the article directly, you are liable to be blocked again. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:13, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again, when/if you are unblocked you can still make suggestions on edits to Talk:Steve Robson. We don't allow entities or their representatives to edit the article because what they write often contains lies-by-omission and/or flowery speech. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 20:09, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]