User talk:Secretchamberman

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 Wizards of Waverly Place, 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. Kubigula (talk) 15:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Wizards of Waverly Place, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NrDg 23:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Wizards of Waverly Place. Fieldday-sunday (talk) 00:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Alexf^(talk) 00:37, 16 August 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).

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

Request reason:

The edits I made were factual and not vandalism. I obtained the information from the newspapers mentioned and by speaking with the CEO of the Rodriguez Film Foundation, Timothy Rodriguez

Decline reason:

Some of the claims in the edits were patently false. Unless you can provide links to the reviews—and USA Today reviews should be searchable online—I agree with the assessment of vandalism. —C.Fred (talk) 01:54, 16 August 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.

| I have searched all of the websites of the newspapers mentioned and neither of them have searchable reviews of ANYTHING. I saw the "USA Today" review in the March 10, 2009 issue, page 9E, and the "New York Times" review in the April 22, 2009 issue, page 13H. The CEO of the Rodriguez Film Foundation can be reached at 212-580-0813, please call him, tell him the SecretChamberMan sent you, tell him your full name, and ask him to read you the Wizards of Waverly Place review. I hope that this information is enough to clear my name, and allow me to continue to contribute more wholly factual information. -Secretchamberman ([User_talk:Secretchamberman|talk]]) 22:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC-5)}}

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Wizards of Waverly Place, you will be blocked from editing. See WP:FAKE - yes I did check. NrDg 22:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]