User talk:StamfordBridgeYeah

May 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page System of a Down has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Geoff ^T ^C 17:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Abi Branning. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Geoff ^T ^C 17:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right, maybe i admit that what i put on the system of a down page was simply a opinion however i feel the other contribution was ok StamfordBridgeYeah (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Lorna Fitzgerald. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Alansohn (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i'm not trying to be funny but i do not see why this edit "vandalises" the page. honestly i dont. StamfordBridgeYeah (talk) 17:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Lorna Fitzgerald. Alansohn (talk) 17:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT?

How can u say that when u dont even respond to my last message. i dont deserved to get blocked. THERE IS NOTHIN WRONG WIV MY EDITStamfordBridgeYeah (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why have i been blocked? what is a sockpuppet? i dont know why u lot are so miltary wtf? StamfordBridgeYeah (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Why am i blocked. u say my edits are vandalism but u dont explain why. u then dont respond when asked and go on to block me. dont u think its a bit unreasonable? also whats all this about suspected sockpuppets

Decline reason:

You are blocked for disruptive editing; this is not the sign of a good-faith editor. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:38, 25 May 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).

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

Request reason:

ok i admitted that ONE edit to system of a down was disruptive and i apolagised. however its the other edits that seem to have caused all the trouble. i cant see whats wrong with them? and why are they saying things about sockpuppets????

Decline reason:

With even a cursory glance at the history of Abi Branning or Lorna Fitzgerald, it's painfully obvious you're either a returning sock or editing on behalf of one, either of which would warrant a block. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:52, 25 May 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).

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

Request reason:

I disagree. Just because someone edits those pages it doesnt mean its the same person

Decline reason:

Ugh, you again? I thought you'd grown up and stopped this nonsense. You aren't planning to spend another two years on this, are you? It was kind of irritating last time. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:59, 25 May 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.