User talk:Powerofawesome

Welcome!

Hello, Powerofawesome, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question.
Again, welcome! --CherryX (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

December 2012

The addition of nonsence to the George Frideric Handel article has been reverted. Please be aware that this is regarded as vandalism and, as a registered user, you are likely to find yourself blocked by adminstrators if you persist in this non-encylopeadic behaviour. Thanks, on behaldf of all of us at the Wiki Project Opera. Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:52, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Powerofawesome, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Powerofawesome! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 27 December 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

i got a girlfriend now so i dont need wiki to make my life interesting anymore, so bye!!!!!(P.S. the league of wiki trolls are everywhere and always will be, mwahahaha!!! Powerofawesome (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No valid reason given to unblock. As previously warned, talk-page access is now denied.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:38, 1 May 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

because i'm ugly and i have no girlfriend Powerofawesome (talk) 15:07, 24 April 2013 (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. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:22, 24 April 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

use smaller words next time, please Powerofawesome (talk) 19:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The only thing about this block that might have been open to question was that it was for so short a period. An indefinite block should have happened long ago. Your fatuous unblock requests have removed all remaining doubt: you will now be blocked indefinitely. Also, because you have been wasting our time with your fake unblock requests, your talk page access will be removed. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:36, 24 April 2013 (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.

April 2013

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Atlanta Hawks. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at The Guardian, you may be blocked from editing. McGeddon (talk) 14:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ~ mazca ^talk 14:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored talk page access, so that you can make a proper unblock request if you like. However, if you make a stupid one again, it is likely that your talk page access will be removed for good. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:05, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]