User talk:Linnea78

I want the article I have created simply removed!!! --Linnea78 (talk) 11:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC) It is not a reason to block anyone!!!![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).

Linnea78 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Want my article to be removed from Wikipedia speedily. I have only requested the page to be removed, have contacted administrators to remove it and tried to blank the article, as advised by Wikipedia. Instead I got blocked by DMacks and he refuse to remove the article for no proper reason. I am the sole and main creator, therfore I should have the right to reuest for deletion /and or blan the page? This is what Wiki instructions say.--Linnea78 (talk) 11:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The deletion will be decided through discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annika Väisänen. Blanking the article or making repeated speedy deletion requests while the discussion is underway is disruptive. Sandstein 13:40, 11 January 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.

I'm sorry, but {{db-g7}} only applies if you are the sole author. Looking at the history of the article in question, there have been contributions from several other authors. TN X Man 12:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you would look at the history properly, you would notice that nobody else has added anything to the article. They have simply removed or reorganised. I am the sole author, and main editor. --Linnea78 (talk) 13:13, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please unblock me. It was done unfairly. Thanks.--Linnea78 (talk) 13:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I want it removed, no matter what the outcome of the discussion. --Linnea78 (talk) 18:13, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have made your opinion quite clear, thank you. DMacks (talk) 19:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Linnea78. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page.
Message added 18:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jayjg ^(talk) 18:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Linnea78. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page.
Message added 01:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jayjg ^(talk) 01:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you decide to request unblock, you'll need to commit to using only one account, and you'll need to explain your plan for writing about topics other than yourself. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Linnea78 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

213.145.198.14 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Abusing multiple accounts

Blocking administrator: FisherQueen (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Closedmouth (talk) 07:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also have not written about myself, that has been explained to FisherQueen as well, but she does not understand. Can I please have her blocked. I do not want to continue being harrassed by her --Linnea78 (talk) 07:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you identify yourself as Annika Väisänen. You have used the accounts User:Apollo789, User:Moveda, and User:213.145.198.14, and tried to pretend that you were four different people in order to "vote" multiple times in a deletion discussion, not realizing that this wouldn't affect the outcome. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:04, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dele Ladimeji

The article Dele Ladimeji has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Long time unsourced BLP with questionable notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wgolf (talk) 05:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]