User talk:Zdawg1029

Clearing the air

Hi there.

I was not wanting to get you off side about the juridicial/juridical/judicial thing. But if you take a step back and see it from another's point of view, you'll perhaps understand why I made my final remark.

I totally acknowledge you didn't start the discussion. Karanne did. She headed the thread "Juridicial?". I'll call that Word A. She wondered whether its appearance in the article shouldn't be "Judicial". I’ll call that Word B.

At this point you entered, and also noted that Word A was in the article but agreed it should be Word B, and you'd be changing it if there were no objections.

Enter Jack of Oz. I did not check the article at this stage, but took the foregoing discussion at face value. I made the point that the word "Juridical" also exists, and I linked to its wiktionary entry. I'll call this Word C. Your response did not suggest to me that you understood this to be either of the words previously mentioned. That is, you accepted that Word C was different from Word A.

Only then did I check the article, but I could find no appearance of Word A, or any evidence it had ever been there, despite you and Karanne having agreed that it was there. You responded with surprise, reiterating that Word A was there, and even copied it and used quotes.

SMP0328 said that Word C was there, and I agreed.

At this point I decided to check elsewhere. I went to the Wikipedia Reference desk/Computing and asked if it is possible for 2 users reading the same article at the same time can see the same word but spelt in different ways (see here). I'd never heard of any such thing, but my IT knowledge is hardly cutting edge. That brought Nil Einne into the discussion. He had a theory as to what was going on.

Then you came back and copied and pasted the word in question again. But this time, hey presto, it had changed from Word A to Word C. But there was no explanation of that change, or even any acknowledgement from you that it had in fact changed.

That's when I piped up again and pointed out that you'd changed your story. You accepted that, but in doing so, you painted a misleading and confusing picture of the error you'd actually made. So, just for the record and posterity, I thought it was prudent to set that particular bit of the record straight. Then I got to the real nub of the question and provided my input, to which you readily agreed.

It seems to me the confusion goes right back to the very start of the thread. Karanne made the spelling error, but your responses, so far from correcting it, unfortunately reinforced it. That was why I was wondering whose eyes were in need of checking.

I suppose there's a message in there somewhere about people being responsible for the words they actually type, as opposed to the words they have in their head, but I'll leave that for you to work out.

So, all cool now, I hope. Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the play-by-play for a conversation I was apart of. But yes, it's fine.Zdawg1029 (talk) 20:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not much help

I left a couple comments back at my talkpage....I'll watch the page and see what you come up with.--MONGO 18:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Duck Dynasty

In regards to Korie Robertson's birthdate, if you search the book "The Duck Commander Family" in Google Books and go to page 35, you will see it. As for the rest, I am still working on them. Thank you. Tannerbc11 (talk) 02:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2013 NFL season assertion

You recently added a comment to the 2013 NFL season article that the upcoming Super Bowl "will be the first cold weather Super Bowl the NFL has held." This statement is not technically true since 1) the Super Bowl has been held in sites such as Minnesota and Detroit in the past, and 2) no one knows for sure that the weather will be cold for this game. I understand the point you are trying to make, which is that it will be the first SB played at an outdoor stadium in a location which typically has cold winters, which is why I didn't just remove the (unreferenced) remark from the article. I'll give you a chance to clarify your statement, and add a citation of a reliable reference to back it up. Thanks! — DeeJayK (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the change. I agree it's very likely to be cold, but you never know. — DeeJayK (talk) 19:31, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Falling Man

Hi, your edit was unsourced and disagreed with multiple references in the article, so I undid it, but if there are good sources for the lower number of jumpers, please do put it in again. thanks PhilMacD (talk) 13:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting in the references. It's an interesting article. PhilMacD (talk) 13:04, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

9/11 In General

Hi Zdawg, Thank you so much for your message on my Talk page. My interest stems from watching those terrible events live and having a friend who lost a close relation on United 93. There is quite a lot of interest in the United Kingdom, but in my personal opinion, most seem to think that the alternate version of events is conspiracy theories gone completely mad. I totally agree. I will add my 9/11 interest to my User page. Keep-up the good work. With kind regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history (October 13)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! buff bills 7701 01:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Zdawg1029, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Active NFL Head Coach Career Super Bowl History

It generally is a good idea to add the references. Alert me when you've done that and I'll accept it. buff bills 7701 02:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history was accepted

Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Lugia2453 (talk) 23:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Congrats on your first article start! MONGO 03:12, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history 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:

Coughlin]] and [[Mike Tomlin]]. [[John Fox]] will advance to his third Super Bowl in his career in [[Super_Bowl_XLVIII|Super Bowl XLVIII], having lost his previous two games, while [[Pete Carroll]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Fox (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Midazolam

Hi. I noticed your edits on Midazolam and Vecuronium bromide while working on Execution of Clayton Lockett, and corrected the implication that those are the only drugs used for executions. You might find the Clayton Lockett article helpful as it goes into the specifics of the situation with those drugs and the shortage of sodium thiopental. ToBk (talk) 22:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say I implied anywhere those are the only drugs used. But whatever, fine. Zdawg1029 (talk) 00:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Midazolam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Condemned

Vecuronium bromide (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Condemned

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lis Robin Kelly

I have left a note at Talk:Lisa Robin Kelly. --Tenebrae (talk) 10:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:41, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Lisa Robin Kelly - additions of uncited material, blasphemous edit summary, more". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 23 November 2014.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 05:30, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Lisa Robin Kelly - additions of uncited material, blasphemous edit summary, more, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, User:TransporterMan (talk) 21:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Join WikiProject Microsoft!

Why don't you join WikiProject Microsoft?

It seems that you have been editing Microsoft-related articles, so why don't you consider joining WikiProject Microsoft, not to be confused with WikiProject Microsoft Windows. WikiProject Microsoft is a group of editors who are willing to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Microsoft, its technologies, Web-based sites and applications, its important people, and share interests regarding Microsoft. This WikiProject is in the process of being revived and is welcoming any and all editors who are willing to help out with the process. Add your name to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft/Participants and/or add the userbox {{User WikiProject Microsoft}}. Thanks! STJMLCC (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zdawg1029. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Net worth of every majority owner of each NFL franchise (September 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Whispering was:

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information Whispe ring 03:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Net worth of every majority owner of each NFL franchise and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Whispe ring 03:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Net worth of every majority owner of each NFL franchise (October 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Joe Decker was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I'm sorry the previous reviewer did not provide good guidance as to how to demonstrate that this sort of article would meet our guidelines. I understand the point of your comparison with presidents here, but that's not the test our policies and guidelines rely on.

First, in legalese, the guideline that is at issue here is WP:LISTN.

What we need to meet that guideline is "multiple, reliable, in-depth sources" which talk about the net worth of NFL owners as a group.

I think the Smith piece in Forbes qualifies as one such source. The rest of the articles here largely concentrate on a single owner, and are possibly good enough to verify the information they reference, but not good enough to meet LISTN.

While less critical here, the use of plain URLs is discouraged. Our scheme for referencing articles is baroque, but it's still important to provide more than a URL. The easiest way to start learning how to make references on Wikipedia is to read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, which includes a nice video showing how to use the RefToolbar, which makes working with references a whole lot easier.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Net worth of every majority owner of each NFL franchise and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

joe decker ^talk 05:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Zdawg1029. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My bad

I didn't see the new Slipknot information you added below. Though I would prefer if you actually formatted it, but that's an easy fix. dannymusiceditor ^oops 20:42, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's cool.Zdawg1029 (talk) 01:01, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Zdawg1029. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Shearonink

Hello, Zdawg1029. You have new messages at Talk:Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.
Message added 01:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shearonink (talk) 01:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neverland Ranch article

Stop WP:Edit warring. I started a discussion section on the talk page about this. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 04:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to Michael Jackson.
The specific details of these sanctions are described here:-

Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

qedk (t 桜 c) 22:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

This is your only warning for violating general sanctions in effect at Neverland Ranch. Any further disruptive editing will result in administrative sanctions. --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:23, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

not american?

not american? on what do you base this wildly inaccurate assertion? =p i'm very curious --Golbez (talk) 00:29, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

oops I misread. It says not Armenian, not American. My bad. Zdawg1029 (talk) 00:39, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Active NFL head coach career Super Bowl history until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Eagles 24/7 (C) 14:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence User talk:Oriolephan2. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow talk about taking your pretend job a little too seriously. It's hilarious, Wikipedia gives you ever so little power and makes you an administrator and you like to thrust your power whenever you can, when it really doesn't even matter. Zdawg1029 (talk) 18:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This notice is fine. Thanks for taking my message seriously despite your response above. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop following me around Wikipedia, it's creepy. Find something else to do. Zdawg1029 (talk) 18:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – bradv🍁 01:40, 5 May 2020 (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).

Zdawg1029 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear bradv, I am sorry I lost my temper a couple, few months ago on here and made personal attacks against you among others. I was extremely upset that a Wiki page I had created and maintained for 7 years was so abruptly deleted. It was hard to take, it still hurts a little bit, but not as much. But as you can imagine, it would make anyone upset. That page was like my baby. I literally grew it from nothing, and made it into what it was. Yeah it was by no means the most popular page among NFL pages, but during the playoffs, it had pretty decent page views on a daily basis. And a lot of people found the information very interesting. But anyways, I'm not here to pitch the return of the page, I am here to apologize for my behavior. Again I am very sorry, it is unlike me for me to do that, I was just very upset and said something very stupid. I don't make it a habit to go around Wikipedia threatening people. In fact if you look at my history, you will see I'm a pretty good editor, so please consider reinstating me now that I have had significant time to cool off, thanks. Zdawg1029 (talk) 00:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I see you decided follow through with your threat to engage in sock puppetry. The standard offer is your best bet now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:25, 10 July 2020 (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'm Confused

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).

Zdawg1029 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm a little confused. I don't know what sock puppetry is. Is that when you have multiple accounts? I got banned on one account, so I started a second account. I was unaware that was a no no. The only thing I did with the second account was a couple of random edits, you can see that, I didn't go around threatening people or doing anything against the rules. All I know is I apologized, with genuine kindness, and asked for my account to be reinstated. My only intention is to edit pages where edits need to be done, not engage in vulgar behavior or threats. Zdawg1029 (talk) 16:41, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

"I got banned on one account, so I started a second account. I was unaware that was a no no." Well, now you know. As noted in the declined appeal above, the standard offer is available to you. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:46, 10 July 2020 (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.

Um ok

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).

Zdawg1029 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Okay well how about this. Fuck you, fuck wikipedia, and shove this website up your ass. The two people who declined my request, as well as the original one who blocked me, you three can go fuck yourselves, because you're a loser. Not just a wikipedia loser, you are a real life loser. Why do I say that you ask? Because you take the rules of Wikipedia so seriously. Oh boo hoo, he had a second account. So fuck you, fuck your mom, fuck your grandma, I'm out. Peace bitches. Zdawg1029 (talk) 17:02, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

OK! Have a nice day! --Golbez (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2020 (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.