User talk:MrLemonAl

January 2023

Hello, I'm Mako001. I noticed that in this edit to Bill Erwin, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 05:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok MrLemonAl (talk) 05:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Joe Scruggs. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i noticed his website was deleted, and allmusic is being used a citation which is not reliable enough. i was just removing those. MrLemonAl (talk) 18:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 19:11, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

whats going on? what did I do? MrLemonAl (talk) 19:14, 31 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

MrLemonAl (talk) 19:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:42, 31 January 2023 (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.

Note to reviewing CU: I think it's pretty clear-cut, but feel free to e-mail me if you have any queries as to the connection between this and the previous accounts (BEANS). Girth Summit _(blether) 19:25, 31 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

i corrected grammar and punctuation on some pages, and was removing outdated information (ex: the Joe Scruggs website was invalid) and was gonna stop doing it this morning before i went to workMrLemonAl (talk) 19:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not relevant to your block. Yamla (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2023 (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.