User talk:Meetshoped2

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Official Languages Act (Canada), did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Official Languages Act (Canada) was changed by Meetshoped2 (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2010-09-14T23:22:05+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 23:22, 14 September 2010 (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).

Meetshoped2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I only got one warning.

Decline reason:

There's no policy saying disruptive editors must be warned multiple times before being blocked. Your edits were clearly vandalism, and even after your warning you made no attempt to improve your behavior. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:39, 14 September 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.

(edit conflict) While I wouldn't have given you an indefinite block myself, I'm not going to unblock at this time because your edit history is composed entirely of blatant vandalism and I see no indication from you that you plan to contribute constructively in future. Feel free to request unblocking again, but I strongly recommend that you think much harder about phrasing your request. Why is this block unnecessary to protect Wikipedia from further disruption? What will we gain by lifting the block? Bovlb (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]