User talk:Impervius

|

7|-|15 u$3r 15 4813 +* ([]|\|7|218u73
\/\/17|-| 4 |*r0f35510|\|@1 13\/31 ()f 1337.

|-

Yes front page on google http://fusionnx.com I am IMPERVIUS THE MAGNIFICENT title courteousy of my physics teacher —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Impervius (talk • contribs) 12:50, June 8, 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place to advertise yourself. Please see WP:BIO and WP:5P for what Wikipedia is and is not. Kershner 19:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rock band

In order for the page of your band to remain on Wikipedia, you must show that it is notable and not a vanity entry. --Blainster 19:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barbed wire

Hi

when i put the barbed wire (rock band) article on the main server, i was advised by a mod to make it my talk page instead. then the article was removed from my talk page. Why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Impervius (talk • contribs) 05:20, July 3, 2006 (UTC)

The talk page history does not show that you posted your band info on this page, or that it was removed by someone else, so I don't understand the question. However, the purpose of the talk page is for discussion with other editors, not personal info. Personal items belong on your userpage, which is where the band info appears to be. Also, please familiarise yourself with the Wiki Info in the Welcome message placed on your talk page by a previous editor. It will help you to learn how to contribute to Wikipedia. It is not considered proper to remove information placed on your page by another editor unless it violates Wiki policy such as no personal attacks. When the page grows very long you may archive older material to a subpage, where it will remain accessible if necessary. --Blainster 22:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trans-namespace links are not a Good Thing (tm). Putting the page on your user / user talk page isn't just a new location for it, where it can be linked to from the article namespace. Nippoo 14:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You

Yes, I remember you, funnily enough. Nippoo 14:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

This account not a vandalism account, i request the ban being shortened

Decline reason:

Well your last two edits to Thomas Burton weren't welcome and you linked to your own website on Shock site. When was the last time you even made a positive contribution to Wikipedia? -- Netsnipe ► 13:06, 4 October 2006 (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.