User talk:PickingGold12

March 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, revert, revert, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 15:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Your editing pattern is unusual for a new user. Chillum 16:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, revert, revert, you will be blocked from editing. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 16:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Foreignguideline

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Template:Foreignguideline, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Template:Foreignguideline|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 16:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:What-note

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Template:What-note, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Template:What-note|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are you doing?

I am not sure what you are doing, but I am pretty sure you are not a new user. Please explain your strange and disruptive edits, or stop doing them, or expect to be blocked. Chillum 16:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My appoligies. PickingGold12 (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think it would be best to block you as a likely sock puppet now. You can be unblocked if you can give a good explanation of how you know the location of some of our more obscure pages and yet don't know how to behave here other than you are a sock puppet acting disruptively. Chillum 16:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked that other administrators review my decision here. Chillum 16:17, 15 March 2009 (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).

PickingGold12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The navigation bar above the Recent Changes options.I find historical pages to be very intresting though.As for the sockpuppet thing,it may be because of my username but I am still trying to learn most of your policies and guidelines that could explain my behaviour

Decline reason:

Incoherent request. Sandstein 17:47, 15 March 2009 (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.

It is that your edits show mischief, not simply a lack of understanding of our policies[1]. They also show you have a fine understanding of how templates work[2]. Chillum 16:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OH that edit was what you were talking about. PickingGold12 (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2009 (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).

PickingGold12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked by a user called Chillum yesterday for concerns of me being a sockpuppet of Pickbothmanlol and for disruptive edits and mischief (fake Message notifcation) and I admit to the edits but I deny being this Pickbothmanlol user that you claim but I give my appoligies for any mischiefious edits I have done.I have made some good edits like a creation of a requested article for instance Bernie Lucht

Decline reason:

Sorry, but it is blatantly obvious that this is not your first account; you aren't being honest with us. A few good edits does not excuse your block evasion. Mango juice^talk 19:15, 16 March 2009 (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.

Clerk note: This user edited {{SPIcat}} with this edit. Attempts to disrupt WP:SPI in this way are entirely consistent with socks of Pickbothmanlol. Mayalld (talk) 14:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]