User talk:Keepingitcool

Oli

That was you? I thought you a typical vandal at first who didn't give a shit. (I thought of "19-year old model" as a judgemental angle at the time.) That's pretty much the only people who mess with Oli's page, but you've obviously proven you mean well (you respond to us without complete hostility), even if it goes the wrong direction. If many others have come forward about it, please show me. I'm willing to take a look at them. And I didn't see the message at first, please leave me messages on my talk page instead. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 19:41, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Hello, I'm Katie lt3. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Todd Howard (video game designer)— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. — Katie <3 (talk) 20:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Todd Howard (video game designer), you may be blocked from editing. — Katie <3 (talk) 20:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- ferret (talk) 20:54, 25 April 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Firstly I know why I was blocked and I won't keep doing it, and as I will explain I had no intention of doing so before I was blocked anyway. But the main reason I'm appealing this instead of waiting for it to expire is because it was not done at all fairly. I made two edits. It was only after the second one where I was told I would be blocked if I CONTINUED to make those edits so I decided to stop and even though I didn't make any more edits I was blocked anyway. What is the point of telling me if I do it again I'll get blocked if I get blocked anyway? If the rule is that if I continued to make those edits (which I had no intention of doing) I would be blocked why was I blocked when I did not continue making those edits? If you intend to block me after two edits say after the first. Don't say after the second one and then block me anyway.

Decline reason:

You didn't need any warning at all. You had previously been warned, and you acknowledged those warnings (by deleting them) for your vandalism burst in June and July of 2017. Your complaints are pointless and I'm surprised you only got a 31 hour block this time. Yamla (talk) 21:12, 25 April 2018 (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.