User talk:Alexiscid

Alexiscid, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Alexiscid! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like John from Idegon (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:08, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Gretchen Whitmer, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:44, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your category creations

Why are you creating eponymous categories which appear to only have one entry in them? power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:50, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop creating one-article categories like you are continuing to do, such as Category:Roger Moore. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA and FA tags

Please don't add that articles are Wikipedia:Featured articles or Wikipedia:Good articles without them having gone through the specified processes. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be 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 noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Hardyplants (talk) 06:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excellency

Hi, do you have reliable sources supporting your addition of the style or honorific "Excellency" to the bios of numerous people? Largoplazo (talk) 12:12, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at List of leaders of North Korea, you may be blocked from editing. Do you have any sources for anything at all? Or are you just making this stuff up? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 09:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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 noticeboards.
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, as you did at Paolo Gentiloni, you may be blocked from editing. Alex2006 (talk) 11:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pleas unlock my ip address Alexiscid (talk) 01:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

His excellency

"Sua Eccellenza" in Italy is NOT a title of the presidente del consiglio. Please revert your additions, thanks Alex2006 (talk) 11:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Giuliano Amato. Alex2006 (talk) 11:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 11:49, 15 September 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello please unblock my IP Address at we soon i hope be good editor. Thanks

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) 00:25, 21 November 2020 (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.