User talk:Wanderloin
| This is Wanderloin's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Nathaniel M. Wutke (February 2)
[edit]
|
Hello, Wanderloin!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! David.moreno72 02:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
|
February 2019
[edit]
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at D. W. Poppy Secondary School, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. David.moreno72 05:20, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Nathaniel M. Wutke
[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Draft:Nathaniel M. Wutke, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.
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. Legacypac (talk) 05:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
February 2019
[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Legacypac (talk) 05:27, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Blocked
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – Athaenara ✉ 09:11, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Wanderloin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello, i feel i have been blocked with out proper cause and therefor should be unblocked. First David Monera stated that i was vandelising local pages, which with proper context i was not, i was simply adding information about the school in which i attend, nothing malicious, simply facts. Then when i tried to ask him about it on his talk page, i got no response. From there out I forgot about it and went on with my life, only to come back on Wikipedia to find 2 more notices, one stating i was still vandelising when i had not made an edit in 6 days, and the other promptly saying I've been blocked. Both times simply saying i was vandelising or adding inappropriate pages, which as i stated, with context to where i am from, i was not. Wanderloin (talk) 01:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Hooey. You were vandalizing, obviously and unambiguously. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 01:50, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
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.
(Ec) You are not a legend in Langley and not here to productively edit Wikipedia. If you don't know that the junk you submitted is inappropriate you are not competent enough to edit here. This user should not be unblocked. Legacypac (talk) 01:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Wanderloin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Ok, so yes, the content i added was not acceptable and upon more extensive reading of the rules i know i was in the wrong, but that doesn't mean you should block my entire Ip address, i have siblings and family who use Wikipedia and shouldn't suffer for you blocking me indefinitely, so wouldn't it make more sense to just ban my account an not my IP so my family and whoever else on my Ip can still edit and contribute? And if any topics involving what i put up before come up then that would be caused for an Ip ban. And for the record, I dont see how its harassment to seasoned editors when i left a message on their talk page and they did not respond nor answered any on my questions, which if they would have this all probably wouldn't have happened. I also feel as if givin a second chance, instead of just banning me over trying to make my own page and what not, i could contribute to Wikipedia. Thank you.Wanderloin (talk) 22:16, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Nothing here resembles taking responsibility for your own actions, and nothing here indicates that unblocking you would improve the encyclopedia. You needed to read the rules to learn that lying is unacceptable? Then you lack the competence to edit Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
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.
I live close enough to know you are not a legend. Go explain to your family how you are a vandal and that is why they can't edit Wikipedia. Registering new accounts is WP:SOCKing and not allowed by the way. Have a happy day. Legacypac (talk) 03:56, 2 March 2019 (UTC)