User talk:Satan2012forever

September 2009

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page 2009 Korba chimney collapse worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Pontificalibus (talk) 21:31, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 21:31, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to The World Ends with You. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Alansohn (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Dress. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. --Sky Attacker Here comes the bird! 02:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Refrain from vandalizing wikipedia and I might consider it.--Sky Attacker Here comes the bird! 06:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user just got reported over at AIV, so that might be a problem. :x SMC (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The account you created has been blocked indefinitely because its username is a blatant violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane; threatens, attacks or impersonates another person; or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames, and trolling or other disruptive behavior is not tolerated. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. bibliomaniac 1 5 06:09, 1 October 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).

Satan2012forever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I know that my behavior has been immature, but please consider to unblock me, for I am not plainning to violate anymore rules. I realize now what I did now is wrong, and I will get full responsibility for my actions.

Decline reason:

Considering you've only made vandalism edits so far, I find your sudden rehabilitation hard to believe. You were also blocked for your username. If you create a new account and make good edits, there won't be a problem. Closedmouth (talk) 10:45, 1 October 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.

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).

Satan2012forever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

it's not the name that makes the person, it's the action that makes the person. you should think of that before making that prejudgment.

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock 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
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Sandstein 05:50, 7 October 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.

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Satan2012forever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

74.39.200.51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Bibliomaniac15

Blocking administrator: not provided.

Decline reason: This is not an autoblock; you are a directly blocked vandal. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:56, 16 October 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).

Satan2012forever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am blocked because I have vandalize some articles, but I shouldn't be banned for my name. I believe that banning me for my name is discrimination, and I demand to be unbanned at once. I am sorry for my misdeeds, but I shouldn't be banned for my name. This is an outraged.

Decline reason:

Sockpuppeting is bad. Also, the username is obviously disruptive for the sake of it. GARDEN 22:16, 16 October 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.

Not that an unblock was likely, but notice that this user has been vandalizing today as User:666isactuallyaholynumber. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]