User talk:Fact finder 1780

May 2008

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Kobe Bryant. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gwernol 00:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. —Chris! _ct 06:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:35, 17 May 2008 (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).

Fact finder 1780 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My edits improve articles. I add factually accurate information and remove factually inaccurate, irrelevant, POV information. It's not my fault that other ignorant editors refuse to read edit summaries or gain an understanding of the significance of each edit made and instead prefer to revert on sight with no reason given on his or her own account. Then one of the editors who engages in edit warring with me, namely User:Gogo Dodo, decides that he/she has the authority to block me. If this is justice, then Wikipedia can go fuck itself.

Decline reason:

This does not address the reason for your block (sockpuppetry). — Sandstein 08:10, 17 May 2008 (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.

Reblocked as sockpuppet

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. As a blocked or banned user you are not entitled to edit Wikipedia. All of your edits have been reverted.

Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Wikipedia:Appealing a block.

-- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]