 | An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a
sockpuppet of
CaptainHog (
talk ·
contribs ·
logs). Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful. Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth |
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
WSFF, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Neutralhomer •
Talk • 02:24 on August 5, 2016 (UTC)
02:24, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I vandalized what? Dude, I cited my sources and did everything. Please point out how I'm "vandalizing" whatever. NoMoreSilence420 ( talk) 02:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
NoMoreSilence420 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I never got an explanation as to how I've "vandalized" anything. Lol. NoMoreSilence420 ( talk) 02:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You were not blocked for vandalism; you were blocked as a sockpuppet created to violate Wikipedia policy. Obvious sock is obvious. — Diannaa ( talk) 02:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
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.
Well good ol' User:Neutralhomer back there said I was vandalizing something. I was looking for an answer to that. NoMoreSilence420 ( talk) 02:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, and in response to you @ User:Diannaa, how do you expect someone to get better at things if you're gonna put them in timeout for forever?
|
| An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a
sockpuppet of
CaptainHog (
talk ·
contribs ·
logs). Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful. Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth |
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
WSFF, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Neutralhomer •
Talk • 02:24 on August 5, 2016 (UTC)
02:24, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I vandalized what? Dude, I cited my sources and did everything. Please point out how I'm "vandalizing" whatever. NoMoreSilence420 ( talk) 02:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
NoMoreSilence420 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I never got an explanation as to how I've "vandalized" anything. Lol. NoMoreSilence420 ( talk) 02:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You were not blocked for vandalism; you were blocked as a sockpuppet created to violate Wikipedia policy. Obvious sock is obvious. — Diannaa ( talk) 02:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
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.
Well good ol' User:Neutralhomer back there said I was vandalizing something. I was looking for an answer to that. NoMoreSilence420 ( talk) 02:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, and in response to you @ User:Diannaa, how do you expect someone to get better at things if you're gonna put them in timeout for forever?