User talk:Nashdelacruz

Welcome!

Hello, Nashdelacruz, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:PlayStation 5 ‎

Hello. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia. I've moved this back from article space. Clearly it is not ready. It's content is largely speculative, and lacks significant coverage from reliable sources to establish notability. When you have remedied matters, please ask for an AfC reviewer to take a look. Thanks, Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:33, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of PlayStation 5

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 PlayStation 5, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view 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. Theroadislong (talk) 13:55, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PayBack 2

The article PayBack 2 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notablity

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:48, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Nashdelacruz/sandbox

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Nashdelacruz/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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 deleted 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. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:24, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PayBack 2

The article PayBack 2 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lacks sufficient coverage in relaible sources. does not meet notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Nashdelacruz/sandbox

User:Nashdelacruz/sandbox, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nashdelacruz/sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Nashdelacruz/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:56, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PayBack 2 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PayBack 2 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/PayBack 2 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. – Train2104 (t • c) 00:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to PayBack 2, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nashdelacruz,

I'm not sure why you're reverting, but I am trying to improve the article you've started. You're adding a template that would suggest it's protected, when it's not, you're taking out the sources I've added for you and you're putting the unsourced table of player statistics back in. Please don't do that anymore. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:43, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...and please don't move pages for no reason. There's no other PayBack 2 on Wikipedia, so there's no reason to make it extra long. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at PayBack 2. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 14:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at PayBack 2.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 14:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Please not editing a wiki

Hi Nashdelacruz,

Why are you keep doing this? Could you please stop? You keep removing the deletion discussion tag and keep adding a protected template, when it's not. This is not okay behaviour. I'm trying to improve PayBack 2, but you're making it very hard. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 14:17, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for either being incapable of competent editing, or just goofing around (either way, a block is necessary).

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 ~~~~}}. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here ~~please unblock me went take me to edit a wiki~~

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. Yamla (talk) 12:45, 9 January 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Please unblock me don't decline request accept this

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.

Please review the Guide to appealing blocks, and make a request that addresses the reason for your block. Continuing to make appeals that do not address the reason for your block may result in you losing access to this page. SQL ^{Query me!} 02:55, 13 January 2018 (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.

5 Months ago after blocked account

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).

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

Request reason:

The Nash delacruz was get old of blocked account please unblock me because me unhappy nash Nashdelacruz (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You continue to not address the reason for your block, and your request is barely coherent. There is at this time no benefit to the project in unblocking you. As such, I am declining this request and removing talk page access. If your language skills improve, you can request an unblock using UTRS. 331dot (talk) 01:14, 21 April 2018 (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 blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #21292 was submitted on Apr 21, 2018 01:43:14. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #23765 was submitted on Jan 14, 2019 08:45:53. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 08:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]