User talk:JyrusTheGreat

June 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to James Marsden, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Ebyabe (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TV standard in the Philippines

Where did you get the idea that the Philippines had changed its television standard to PAL? I lived here for the past 20 years and so far the HAVE NOT CHANGED the TV standard and it is still NTSC. -WayKurat (talk) 08:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Philippines uses PAL-M not NTSC-M. --JyrusTheGreat (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From what country are you from? You are still insisting false information. The Philippines uses NTSC standard from the time television started here and it haven't changed since. One more false edit and I will report you again to the administrators. -WayKurat (talk) 22:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Digital television in the Philippines, you will be blocked from editing. -WayKurat (talk) 22:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to PAL. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. -WayKurat (talk) 22:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:08, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look out. You been reported to the Wikipedia:AIV for disruptive editing. Beware, you WILL get blocked. Blocky cuzco (talk) 00:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

-WayKurat (talk) 01:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to System M. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. -WayKurat (talk) 16:11, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

February 2010

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to PAL. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. You still haven't proven that the Philippines OFFICIALLY changed TV standards to PAL. This is considered disruptive vandalism. You do this one more time, I will report you again to WP:AIV to block you from editing here. -WayKurat (talk) 22:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The account you created has been blocked indefinitely because it has become apparent that it is being used only for vandalism. Furthermore, your username is a blatant violation of our username policy, meaning that it is profane; threatens, attacks, or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames, and trolling or other disruptive behavior is not tolerated. 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.

Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 5 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Kuru (talk) 17:26, 6 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Because I changed Philippine's TV standard from NTSC to PAL-M.

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2010 (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.

Please note that further unblock requests that do not address the reasons for the block may result in your loss of the ability to edit this talk page to appeal the block. Repeatedly adding unsourced or improperly sourced material to Wikipedia is the main reason for your block. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Because I want to edit to improve.

Decline reason:

Hey, isn't this another sockpuppet of User:23prootie, who is banned? I just declined unblock requests from two other users whose contribution histories were really similar to this account's. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:34, 6 February 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

original unblock reason

Decline reason:

Enough already. Please limit yourself to one account. Kuru (talk) 23:45, 6 February 2010 (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.