User talk:Tylerwade123

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).

Tylerwade123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Okay you Wikipedia user I've stop using my numbered sockpuppet user accounts so let me back for crying out load i've been patient for a long time dammit

Decline reason:

What about your unnumbered ones? Not convinced here. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:00, 19 March 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).

Tylerwade123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I looked at my investigation account and I don't know who the hell User:Rebelprince is but he's not one my stockpuppets only you idiots think he is dumbasses, difference between me and him is that he's to much of a wuss to stand up to guys so let me back on

Decline reason:

Generally not a good idea to attack other editors and administrators when requesting an unblock request. Declined; further abuse will result in this page being locked. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:42, 19 March 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).

Tylerwade123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Look all I want is to return to wikipedia I've deleted all my stockpuppet accounts except User:Rebelprince why because he is not one of my meatpuppets, just let me back on okay.

Decline reason:

You have neither apologised for past behaviour nor given any committment to the future. And your antagonistic unblock request is not an ideal format. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:35, 23 March 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).

Tylerwade123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have acknowledged the error of my ways, I admit I am guilty Wikipedia:Stockpuppetry and Wikipedia:Vandalism. However my pro-claimed Vandalism was only because there where articles that need fixing up, as for stockpuppets there is no excuse that I ignored Wikipedia's guideline rules and for that I am sorry, all I wanted was to improve and create articles but I guess I took it too far and apologize for that, all can say is that I won't do it again and that you give me another chance if then I understand. P.S. If you chose not to unblock, I would like the articles I was working on to be deleted list down below cause because without me they are useless. *User:Tylerwade123/GN-005 Gundam Virtue *User:Tylerwade123/GN-005 Gundam Virtue/GN-005 Gundam Virtue *User:Tylerwade123/GN-008 Seravee Gundam/GN-009 Seraphim Gundam *User:Tylerwade123/ZGMF-X42S Destiny Gundam

Decline reason:

Per comments below regarding insuffiency of request in addressing past misconduct. -- Daniel Case (talk) 21:11, 8 April 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).

Tylerwade123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will not Vandalize pages, I will not use stock puppets, and I'm aware that I do not own articles and if there are problems with a page I will I'll ttry to solve them through discussion rather than my own personal view, if you still chose not to unblock me then I understand.

Decline reason:

Given your history of abuse of multiple accounts and other serious issues, I think this would be premature. I suggest that it might be reasonable to unblock you after a 6 month block period (September 2, 2009), which will demonstrate your sincerity about not evading blocks. Mango juice^talk 17:54, 10 April 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).

Tylerwade123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Well basically I have stated that violations I have made on Wikipedia and I accept the responsibility for those actions however I still wish to edit on Wikipedia to improve articles, for more discussion before you make your choice pleas edit below and I'm truly sorry if I am wasting your time.

Decline reason:

You are. Come back in September and do not sock until then. Sandstein 20:10, 18 April 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.

6 month block period

Well for deleting my pages I thank you User:Mangojuice, as for the 6 month block period can we try 1 month.--Tylerwade123 (talk) 05:20, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The suggested time period was without you attempting to evade the block. Since you've now been blocked for evasion under yet another nick [1], I don't think the admins are likely to shorten the block times on any of your socks. Edward321 (talk) 02:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well I guess somethings I haven't been cleared up yet but forget that now, how about this if I do anything wrong you can block me permanently even block my user talk page honestly you guys can block and unblock me anytime and even if I make a single bad edit you can undo it if you wish. So truthfully speaking you've got nothing to loose while I have everything to loose.--Tylerwade123 (talk) 05:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey somebody going answer me this is a good option here for you guys.--Tylerwade123 (talk) 15:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SpikeSpeigelSS.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SpikeSpeigelSS.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]