User talk:Mcdragonsi
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 17:48, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Mcdragonsi (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:
I am declining your unblock request 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 the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Kuru (talk) 19:29, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
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.
Mcdragonsi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am appealing the block not based that I regret what I have done but as a protest to the manor of which the Wikipedia have treated me with contempt (yes, I am looking at you user:Bbb23) from the very beginning. If I am not treated with a little respect as an editor I do not owe any back. I intend to report this issue as highly as possible or far as I can be bothered to. I have been a Wikipedia for years with an unblemished account. For my decisions to be overthrown without a single valid explanation (and no, I do not take the automatic page speed deletion requests as proper and valid explanations!!). I can understand why so many editors feel bullied by admins but I truly didn't understand the problem until now.
Decline reason:
No reason given to unblock. Please note - the warnings you have been given are valid; if you remove block or unblock messages again your block will be extended and your access to this page WILL be revoked. This is a fair warning; step back and think before you react.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 20:57, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
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.
- Warning. I've said this twice in edit summaries. You are not permitted to remove the active block notice or the history of declines per WP:BLANKING. If you do so again, I will revoke your talk page access.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Warning to Admins I am getting slowly sick and tired of you people. I am half tempted to call you what I really think and you can all **** ***. The instructions clearly stated I can "then use the unblock template" to request unblock. It clearly appears from all communication I have with admins here that you have clearly balls bigger than you keyboards and think you have been given deity-like powers to bully editors. Thank you.
Oh, yes, and I forgot. I don't care about your warnings Bbb23. Just so you know. Martin McDowell (talk) 20:20, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Unwelcome comment (probably). I'm quite prepared to userfy the article for you and would have done so on request earlier. So would Bbb23, I'm quite sure. At the AN discussion, I've pointed out your good record of editing. I at least am not here to bully people. Nor are most of the admins I know. Just like non-admins and non-Wikipedians, we respond better to calm talk. Do you want me to move the article into your user space for you to finish it when you calm down and request unblock calmly (or when the block runs out if you don't), or would you prefer me to **** *** and not do it? Up to you. If I'm not around tonight, I'll respond tomorrow morning if someone else hasn't done it already. Peridon (talk) 21:24, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Mcdragonsi
[edit]
Please do not introduce inappropriate pages, such as User:Mcdragonsi, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CptViraj (Talk) 17:25, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
The redirect Mobile World (mobile phone operator) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 20 § Mobile World (mobile phone operator) until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:19, 20 May 2023 (UTC)