User talk:Big sweaty Mark

hey mark it's time to do your duty and

File:Negro Stab.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Negro Stab.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue removing Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 May 17, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Stabbing. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. – B.hotep •talk• 10:04, 18 May 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Ok ok, but when does the block expire?

Decline reason:

It doesn't. ⇦REDVƎRS⇨ 11:05, 18 May 2010 (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.

It's indefinite. It has no set expiration date or time. It means you have to convince a reviewing admin that you are going to stop this disruptive behaviour. Good luck. – B.hotep •talk• 11:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]