User talk:Aliceinsprings

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Aliceinsprings, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Reconsider ! 09:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Theres nothing wrong with your edits. In future though, it is a good idea to wait for a response before going ahead, because after all Wikipedia is a collaborative project. Cheers.-Reconsider !

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Jonathan King. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Shakehandsman (talk) 07:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan King

I spent some time bringing all the references into a consistent and correct format. Why did you reverse my changes? You even restored inconsistent date formats, when date formats should be consistent throughout any one article. This is a UK article so it uses British date format. Please do not make further disruptive edits of this kind. -- Alarics (talk) 22:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of LudoVicar (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:39, 21 January 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here I have no idea who ludovicor is and I am not a sock puppet Aliceinsprings (talk) 21:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per below; saying you're not a sockpuppet is not enough to get you out of a sockpuppetry block (otherwise no sock would stay blocked for very long). — Daniel Case (talk) 14:10, 21 April 2014 (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.

Judging by the dates of account creation, you could be right that you aren't a sockpuppet. As this is an older account, which very interestngly has a gap in its editing that was filled by LudoVicar's editing, you could well be the sockmaster. Peridon (talk) 21:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]