User talk:Eilot94

December 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Whopper has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Whopper was changed by Eilot94 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.984009 on 2015-12-27T04:10:05+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eilot (Whopper eater)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Eilot (Whopper eater), 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 removed 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. reddogsix (talk) 04:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at New Zealand Music Commission. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: New Zealand Music Commission was changed by Eilot94 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.981928 on 2015-12-27T04:12:49+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:12, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Outnumbered, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Outnumbered was changed by Eilot94 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.964362 on 2015-12-27T04:17:18+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:17, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chicken bolognese

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Chicken bolognese, 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 removed 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. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 04:21, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Lauren Branning.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Lauren Branning was changed by Eilot94 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.96573 on 2015-12-27T04:26:34+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My unblock

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).

Eilot94 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Second chance please my edits are a vandalism joke. Eilot94 (talk) 04:52, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

When honest and hard working editors have to waste valuable time dealing with vandalism, it is most definitely *not* a joke - and the fact that you think it is a joke suggests you should not be participating here. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:15, 27 December 2015 (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.

Ah, that will not be easily acceptable as games like those are not tolerated here. Familiarize yourself with how Wikipedia works and perhaps ask again then. SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 27 December 2015 (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).

Eilot94 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Second chance please my edits are a vandalism joke. Can i contobute constructively next time when i get unblocked. Eilot94 (talk) 12:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Agree with what Boing! said Zebedee says above. only (talk) 12:40, 27 December 2015 (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).

Eilot94 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Second chance please my edits are a vandalism joke. Can i contobute constructively next time when i get unblocked. I wouldn't give clue why? dunno maybe lone, double whoppers and vandalism joke. I will edit productively i consider. Eilot94 (talk) 23:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Same reason again. PhilKnight (talk) 21:29, 3 January 2016 (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.