User talk:TheKittehSaysYeah!

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Boi 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. Epbr123 (talk) 23:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to User talk:Epbr123 constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Epbr123 (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT DA

A tag has been placed on WHAT DA, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:Epbr123. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Epbr123 (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of WHAT DA

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as WHAT DA, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Eeekster (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, such as WHAT DA, you will be blocked from editing. Eeekster (talk) 23:16, 11 January 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 I Don't Think So. Alansohn (talk) 23:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- lucasbfr ^talk 23:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BS!!!

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).

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

Request reason:

Hey maybe i vandalized a little bit but i didnt edit after my final warning this is ridiculou!!!!!!I PROMISE IF YOU UNBLOCK ME I WILL FIND SOMETHING GOOD TO DO, IT WAS WRONG OF ME AND I KNO THAT BUT IM SORRY!! PEASE, JUST UNBLOC ME.

Decline reason:

I'm not terribly concerned whether or not you edited since your last warning. You are a sockpuppet in evasion of a block, by your own admission in your first post with this account. I see no legitimate reason to even consider unblocking you. — Trusilver 23:41, 11 January 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

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).

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

Request reason:

well i did say that but that was apart of teh vandalizm!1 dont you get it it was a lie i didn't know wikipedia was jut for seriouses but now i realize what it is and that i should help build it. so if you unblock me or atlease let me create a new fresh account or change my name or something i will show you that i can realy help! please find it in your heart to forgive me.

Decline reason:

If you say you lied once, how do we know you aren't lying now? Plus, we don't grant requests written in poorly formed LOLCAT: "teh vandalizm!1" and "jut for seriouses". — Smashville^talk 00:37, 12 January 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.

someone with a good hert plese!!!

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).

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

Request reason:

please everybody lise sometimes its when they do it 2 much dat its a problem rihgt? i am a sykologist i know teh readsons for mental stuff like this! please know tat i am sory everyone makes mistgakes i dont want to have t wate 8 days to get back on wikipeda please!1 and dont make fun of me peasse smashvile i am portugesi that's why o speakk bad

Decline reason:

No. You're clearly a sock, and being silly. I've removed your ability to edit this page. Kuru ^talk 00:56, 12 January 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.