User talk:Tdawg4701

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).

Tdawg4701 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize for my disruptive edits and for my personal attacks. Both reasons are why I was blocked. Furthermore, I would like to be unblocked because I will definitly make useful edits and stop vanadalising pages because it is wrong. I clearly understand why I was blocked and I once again sincerely apologize for my edits that were not useful. If I am unblocked I will follow the rules of wikipedia and be a contribute true and good edits and well written articles. I am sorry for the problem and if I am unblocked, I will do everything I can to be a good citizen and a good editior of wikipedia. Thank you!

Decline reason:

It's hard to take the word of somebody who makes edits like this and this at face value. This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Read our guide to improving articles
Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas. Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:

Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
• do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}});
• do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]);
• do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]);
• do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
Click edit at your talk page, and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include citations to reliable sources (which they should), place at the end of the prose you copied this template {{reflist-talk}} and then save.

Now, edit that content to propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:38, 13 March 2011 (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.

Proposed deletion of Amazing Ella

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Amazing Ella, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Article about a book that has not received enough media coverage to be worthy of inclusion in the project.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 20:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits 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. JNW (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2008 (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.

AfD nomination of Amazing Ella

An article that you have been involved in editing, Amazing Ella, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amazing Ella. Thank you. JNW (talk) 22:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tdawg4701. This article, Amazing Ella is likely to be deleted. The reason for this is we cannot find any reliable, third-party sources that establish the Amazing Ella as a notable online series. In fact, the only reference in the article is to a nonexistent website, www.amazingella.com. If this online series is still active or otherwise notable, could you help us with some outside sources that mention Amazing Ella's notability? Feel free to respond here, I will be watching this talk page. -kotra (talk) 21:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jumbah 64

A tag has been placed on Jumbah 64 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

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 the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Unusual? Quite ^TalkQu 16:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Philadelphia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to User:JNW has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 00:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to User:Guoguo12 constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 00:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User:JNW, you may be blocked from editing. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 00:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User:Guoguo12, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nolelover^{It's almost football season!} 00:22, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing for Vandalism, personal attacks. If you feel this block is unjustified, you may contest it by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. -- Lear's Fool 00:25, 7 March 2011 (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).

Tdawg4701 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I had very useful and good edits. I think it was wrong to block me for an indefinate amount of time. I would ask to be please be unblocked so I may continue to make useful edits to pages and create pages that I believe should bo on wikipedia. Thank you!

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. Favonian (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2011 (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.

Proposed deletion of Kerri Lee Mayland

The article Kerri Lee Mayland has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. –MuZemike 00:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]