User talk:DellLaptop

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Star Mississippi, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. StarM 23:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/The Account for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. StarM 23:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Kww. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.—Kww(talk) 00:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What

i dont get itDellLaptop (talk) 22:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} I've been accused of sockpuppets and I don't really know how to handle it. I read about what it is and I'm not a sockpuppet. What else should I do?

Well, just wait for checkuser and then you'll be fine. _David ^WS _(contribs) 22:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read a little bit about that are they aloud to use checkuser on everyone? On the page WP:CHECKUSER it said "The tool should not be used for political control" and the case was about me putting userboxes with political phrases in them on other pages.

That's not what it's talking about. They'll checkuser you. If you are a sockpuppet, you will be banned. If you are not, you will not be. _David ^WS _(contribs) 22:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK DellLaptop (talk) 22:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely doubt anything will happen. As I commented, I'm pretty sure that you are a sock puppet of somebody, and I have a difficult time believing that you would choose that group of three editors at random. I don't think that you are The Account, though, so the checkuser will fail if it is ever run. I've seen sock-puppet reports stay open for a month, and there's not a thing I can do to accelerate the process. I didn't open it, and don't have the power to close them. Just focus on actually being a constructive editor, and you shouldn't have anything to worry about.—Kww(talk) 00:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

{{Help}} I have a really good idea for wikipedia but I can't find anywhere for "suggestions"

Try the Village Pump. //roux 23:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above is for suggesting improvements to Wikipedia processeses - it's not clear from your question, but if you would like to suggest new articles take a look at Requested Article ;) 217.39.1.99 (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Case

{{help}} I'm being accused of sockpuppetry and in the page WP:SOCK/SUSPECT it said if the accuser (User:Star Mississippi) didn't request checkuser in 10 days the case would be closed by an admin? Thanks! DellLaptop! 00:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The case was submitted on November 11, 2008 at 23:45 and it's November 21, 2008 00:07 DellLaptop! 00:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be patient. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 00:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks for the reply DellLaptop! 00:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone is a volunteer, nothing runs on time, eh? Wily D 00:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True that, but some people are just busy -DellLaptop! 00:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After some consideration, I've closed the case in your favour. Don't let me down! —SMALL JIM 23:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, DellLaptop. You have new messages at Smalljim's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

September 2009

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. –túrian^patois 01:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page User:Turian has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. CAPT. JIM KIRK 22:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to user:King of Hearts. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 22:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:Gay15boy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. RuneScape Adventure 22:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

--John (talk) 22:58, 2 October 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

The last edit I made to Gay15Boys page was not vandalism I was talking to him on his talk page it's not part of the encyclopedia. Help!

Decline reason:

Nothing but vandalism from this account. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:04, 2 October 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).

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

Request reason:

WHY ARE ALL OF YOU SO CONCERNED WITH KEEPING WIKIPEDIA VANDALISM FREE NONE OF YOU ONE IT! NOBODY RECOGNIZES THIS ON A RESUME! YOU ALL NEED TO GET A LIFE! WIKIPEDIA IS FINE. I ONLY VANDILIZED USER PAGES AND TALK PAGES WHICH ARE NOT A PART OF THE ENCYCLOPEDIA SO KNOCK IT OFF!

Decline reason:

Per WP:VANDAL, vandalism applies to all namespaces, not just the Article namespace. Also, if you're so concerned about the rest of us "getting a life," then why do you want to edit, anyway? I'm going to cease your trolling. Talk page protected due to repeated abuse. --Kinu ^t/_c 23:34, 2 October 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.