User talk:Reviewhome

Speedy deletion nomination of Sightlink - AR-15

Hello Reviewhome,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sightlink - AR-15 for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian 20:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Institute for Interstellar Studies may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

7431` b n m\];;s=-=-09887654322221``````````````

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:57, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Screenpresso

Hello Reviewhome,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Screenpresso for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Juhuyuta (talk) 04:18, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bilby (talk) 10:20, 15 June 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have no idea why I am banned for indefinite time and why I will be blocked for an unknown banned user: Arifhasan23. I promised that I have no relation with this and any user ID like this. I have done and am doing all legitimate works to create and edit page. I strongly protest such banning Reviewhome (talk) 17:35, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkusers seldom make mistakes. John (talk) 10:35, 21 June 2014 (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.