User talk:Grandma and Grandpa Spencer

July 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian, as you did at User talk:Sundayclose. Sundayclose (talk) 22:23, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I am not harrasing i am just asking a question.--Grandma and Grandpa Spencer (talk) 22:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Please stop reverting edits on User talk:Sundayclose. The editor is entitled to remove comments from their own talk page (see WP:OWNTALK) and it is not appropriate to revert that removal. Schazjmd (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

But the edit is valid with reliable sources and it even has a page so what about the sources are misrepresented? That is all I want to know.--Grandma and Grandpa Spencer (talk) 22:41, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

– bradv🍁 22:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: On the Case with Paula Zahn Season 1 (July 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TheImaCow was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:On the Case with Paula Zahn Season 1 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:On the Case with Paula Zahn Season 1, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

--TheImaCow (talk • contribs) 09:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Grandma and Grandpa Spencer! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! --TheImaCow (talk • contribs) 09:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)