User talk:Lil Pablo 2007

Stop

Stop making mass changes from "English" to "British". If you wish to reinstate the edits, get consensus first. Praxidicae (talk) 14:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I am specyfing more that the people know more that what country or territory of UK, OK?, For example is more common see English instead British.

First, I'm not a dude and second, you're going against policy and consensus. Did you bother to read the talk page for Freddie Mercury as an example? It's literally in giant bold letters: Consensus has been reached that Queen is an active group, and Mercury is considered to have been British in Nationality and Indian in ancestry. Please do not change this without first changing consensus. Do not continue mass changing ethnicity without consensus. Praxidicae (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but Freddie Mercury rises on England, because I put English, just in case you are refering references

Freddie Mercury was not English just because he lived in England. He also lived in Germany and Switzerland. His citizenship was British, his ethnicity was Indian, he was raised in Zanzibar and India. There is no justification for changing the description from British to English. If you persist in changing it you will be blocked. ... discospinster _talk 15:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understood but I can change in the other pages that you reverted, I think British is from the people that live in other parts of UK?

Just don't. You're going against both policy and consensus. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 16:49, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- And you're doing it again. Don't change "British" to "English" Acroterion (talk) 02:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Your English language skills are not as good as you appear to believe - please stop instructing people on your interpretation of the ethnology of the British Isles. Acroterion (talk) 02:57, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.--Asqueladd (talk) 14:40, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Roald Dahl. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. I would strongly encourage you to discuss this at the article's Talk page rather than reinserting the information without discussion. DonIago (talk) 17:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This, for the third time, is not acceptable. Use the talk page or you will be reported to be blocked. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reversiones

This is Facu-el Millo's reply to your question: La razón ya fue explicada en cada resumen de edición, pero tus principales ediciones fueron agregar sinopsis a las películas del Universo cinematográfico de Marvel. Estas secciones resultan redudantes, debido a que ya hay una sección que detalla la trama completa, sumado a un pequeño resumen de dos líneas en la sección inicial. Sinopsis como esta en Spider-Man: Homecoming tienen oraciones con juicios de valor (versión de es.wiki) con muchas palabras que deben ser evitadas (versión de es.wiki), además de que fueron sacadas de otro sitio web sin estar entre comillas ni tener la referencia adecuada, lo que lo convierte en una violación de derechos de autor. --Kailash29792 (talk) 16:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

British and English

Please familiarise yourself with the essay WP:UKNATIONALS. The guidance is to refer to UK nationals as British unless they have clearly associated themselves in some way with one of the four countries - England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland - for example by playing for one of their national sporting teams or being associated with one of the devolved parliaments. Thanks. (And, stop edit warring.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. ... discospinster _talk 16:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Block for specyfing data

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).

Lil Pablo 2007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why did you block me, I am only specyfing what part of UK is it, in the other part in the movies I am only putting correct data or tha may that needed, it's correct what I am saying. Please, Im begging to you don't block me forever only a few months please, my only intention is to be a better Wikipedia putting English instead of British because English is more frequent to see, please don't block me forever, I am so sorry I promise to build a better Wikipedia. Lil Pablo 2007 (talk) 17:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As you see no problems with your edits, there are no grounds to consider lifting the block. Yamla (talk) 17:20, 7 May 2021 (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.

Block

But please don't block me forever I will not doing that again, I am sorry, I am begging to the other Wikipedist. --Lil Pablo 2007 (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the guide to appealing blocks. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 06:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to all Wikipedia

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).

Lil Pablo 2007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry of my edit behavior on Wikipedia, my edits was so destructible and I feel so bad to that, I accept some days of block, but no forever. I promise when I editing putting references and don't making mass changes because the references is not mass changes. Especially, I ask from forgive to Discospinster and Ghmyrtle, I am sorry from changing "British" to "English" arbitrarily. When I will unblocked, I promise edit with references (And "British to "English" too but with references). --Lil Pablo 2007 (talk) 13:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you're presently evading your block with an IP address to do this again, I'm declining your request, and I've blocked the IP. Acroterion (talk) 14:07, 10 May 2021 (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.

Don't alter unblock requests. Respond separately. Acroterion (talk) 14:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is now a checkuser block. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 14:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clear out, something maybe you can confused

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).

Lil Pablo 2007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Acroterion, I swear to god I wasn't me, I am innocent. Someone use an IP and start editing British, please believe me because I am not lying, It wasn't me. I would not do such a thing, it's strangely.--Lil Pablo 2007 (talk) 14:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are not being truthful. I just blocked six more of your accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 14:26, 10 May 2021 (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.

I am innocent, I promise

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).

Lil Pablo 2007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am saying the truth. Jpgordon, I don't evade block, That IPs there are not me, I swear to God that I am saying the true, I don't dare to make such a thing, It wasn't me, trust me please!!!. It's strange, more IP that are not me, like in the comment of Acroterion, that user has a good command of English, where i don't have it and there's some IPs from another countries. That's is a signal that I am innocent, that IPs edit some things of music and I don't. --Lil Pablo 2007 (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See below

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.

Six accounts have been blocked apart from the probable proxy IP: that's enough for an indefinite block, which can't be changed by anyone but a checkuser. Acroterion (talk) 14:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS trolling

This user was told by another admin in UTRS appeal #43201 that UTRS was no longer available to them. They've extensively trolled UTRS, so I got more explicit in UTRS appeal #44472. All further requests made via UTRS should be denied unread. They have a final avenue available to them to contest the block: email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-en@wikimedia.org. That said, it's hard to imagine ArbCom granting an unblock given the extensive abuse from this user. Still, I suppose WP:SO is plausible. --Yamla (talk) 15:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User was evading their block in December, 2021, pushing the soonest WP:SO would be available to them to 2022-05-06. --Yamla (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user continued to troll UTRS in UTRS appeal #51889. --Yamla (talk) 21:54, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]