User talk:MazerTown99

November 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Night of Champions (2014). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Nickag989^talk 15:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The user appears to be starting a trend. He is vandalizing articles and then occasionally self reverting and occasionally not. - Galatz ^Talk 18:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When have I not been reverting? I have literally put every page back to normal after I was done getting the screenshot. I was in the middle of doing Fast Lane 2016 when you put it back, so obviously I did not revert that one because I was still editing it. You guys need to chill out and trust that I will revert back like I have been doing every single time. "a trend". Jesus.

You are not allowed to vandalise Wikipedia even if you revert yourself. It is disruptive, as every edit will appear on the watchlist of everyone watching the relevant article. If you need to create screenshots, use the preview function. Silverfish (talk) 18:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Payback (2016). Silverfish (talk) 19:37, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 19:56, 27 November 2017 (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).

MazerTown99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will use the Preview function for screenshots from now on. I will never again edit the pages in a vandalistic way. I did not see the warning before I edited the page for Payback 2016 MazerTown99 (talk) 02:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It doesn't appear that you are here to contribute productively to the encyclopedia so, no. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:55, 28 November 2017 (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).

MazerTown99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I literally have written all of the Background section for Clash Of Champions 2017 so far. If you don't believe me, check my IP and the IP of the writer of that section of the post. That's productive, is it not? I deserve to be let back as I will not disrupt the process any longer, only contributing positively like the background for Clash Of Champions. MazerTown99 (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The Background section for Clash Of Champions 2017 was written by multiple accounts and IPs, and we cannot see what your IP is. All we can judge this account on is edits made from this account, and what I see recently is a series of you making edits and then reverting them - which you appear to suggest is for making screenshots of what can only be fake versions of Wikipedia articles. That's not what Wikipedia is for, and it is disruptive. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2017 (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.

{unblock|reason== I have taken a break from Wikipedia for a few days now. If you unblock me now and give me a second chance I will do nothing but good for Wikipedia. I wrote the background section of Clash Of Champions for the Mahal/Styles match whilst I was at a different location and I wish to do more of the same. i can be very valuable to this site, and I want to help out. You will see me do no wrong. I ask one last time for an unblock.}

I'm a little confused: what do you mean that you "wrote the background section...whilst [you] [were] at a different location"? Do you mean that you edited the article recently from another account or an IP address? only (talk) 22:25, 4 December 2017 (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).

MazerTown99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I should've explained that better, I was not a different location when I did it, I was at my house, but for some reason for that night I could still edit on my cell phone and I typed up that portion of the article, alas as an anonymous guest user and would be revoked from my privileges afterward. I would love to continue to contribute to all future and past WWE articles in a way that adds and does not subtract. I think I can be valuable to the community. MazerTown99 (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

So, in addition to disruptive editing, you've engaged in block evasion? No, clearly it would be inappropriate to unblock you, now or in the near future. Yamla (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2017 (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).

MazerTown99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

How about we just set my block to expire January 1st? A new year, and a new slate. I think that's fair. I promise to be valuable from there on. MazerTown99 (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Only one open request at a time is needed. Procedural close. SQL ^{Query me!} 22:52, 7 December 2017 (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).

MazerTown99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry to post another one of these, I don't know whether you can just add to other requests or not, but I just wanted to add that while I now realize that Block Evasion is frowned upon and I should not have performed it, I think that really just shows my passion and dedication to edit the encyclopedia and make it the best it could possibly be. I love this community, and I don't want one mistake due to my unknowing effect that.MazerTown99 (talk) 5:32 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

Sorry, your "passion" does not justify your breaking of our policies. At this point, your best bet is to consider the standard offer and come back in 6 months. only (talk) 23:30, 7 December 2017 (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).

MazerTown99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Alright, if that's what it really takes, I will wait the 6 months and hope to return on June 7th, 2018. It worries me right now that my block expiry says "no expiry set", so I'd I hope we can have that timeframe of 6 months to replace that. I don't really know what other way to convey that I've changed and want to help this community thrive without you all shooting it down again and forcing me to take the standard offer. It seems that's the only way, so let's do it. MazerTown99 (talk) 00:43, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Technical decline, as this is not an unblock request. As per below, please use WP:UTRS when the Standard Offer period has expired. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:35, 10 December 2017 (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 isn't even an unblock request, so I have revoked talk page access. Six months from today, you can make your case at WP:UTRS if this "unblock" request is declined. --Yamla (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]