User talk:Mlubis

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Mean as custard (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Mean as custard (talk) 14:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Mean as custard (talk) 14:58, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is the sort of 'factual content' we don't need: "Built on a strong heritage of industry experience, technological expertise and service excellence, we help our clients connect to their customers to help them save, protect and grow their assets, plan for retirement and live a healthy lifestyle". . .Mean as custard (talk) 15:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True. I will scrape that out. If you will allow it. Mlubis (talk)

I removed some promo content. How come you didn't just delete the promo content rather than reverting back to existing, incorrect content? Mlubis (talk)

Too little, too late. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have I offended you personally? Mlubis (talk)

No, you have offended the Wikipedia project by treating it as an outlet for blatant advertising content. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is offensive & pathetic you keep reverting to old information. Mlubis (talk)

Stop reverting Mean as custard's edits and wikistalking them. If there is a problem, that is why articles have talk pages. Epicgenius (talk) 16:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:28, 2 December 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).

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

Request reason:

I believe me being blocked is incorrect. Originally, I added content that was seen as promotional and I removed it. There was little tolerance for change. The new CEO for DST has been in his role for 2+ yaers. The current information is incorrect. I also updated their service offering. I was blocked for adding disruptive content.Mlubis (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This seems to be a poor summary of the events. You added very promotional material to the article several times and were warned to stop. You then followed the editor who challenged your edits to another unrelated article and made a poor reversion there. At that point, you've developed a pattern of disruptive editing. To be unblocked you will need to recognize the problem and state how your behavior will change. Kuru (talk) 02:34, 3 December 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.