User talk:Millsstory

October 2011

Hello, and 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 Haaretz, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

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 NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, 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: Haaretz was changed by Millsstory (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.900085 on 2011-10-12T02:43:16+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 02:43, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at J Street, you may be blocked from editing. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Haaretz, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:36, 12 October 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

It is no surprise that I was banned by an Arab, my sworn enemy. In fact, I was committing no vandalism whatsoever.

Decline reason:

Attacks like that won't help you much, declined Alexandria (Ni!) 20:11, 12 October 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have engaged in no attacks nor vandalism; this is obviously a campaign to eradicate Wikipedia of Jews.

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
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:19, 12 October 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

The block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia — I have not damaged nor disrupted Wikipedia and I do not plan to.
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for, — I have been blocked for vandalism by my enemy. The charge is a lie; he should be the one blocked.
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, — I have not caused any damage or disruption in the first place.
3. will make useful contributions instead. — I already have been doing this.

Decline reason:

Calling an admin "your enemy" does not get you unblocked. Talk paged locked. Alexandria (Ni!) 20:27, 12 October 2011 (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.

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Millsstory for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. RolandR (talk) 09:19, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]