|
Hello, I'm
Flyer22 Reborn. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Transform fault have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page.
Flyer22 Reborn (
talk)
08:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations! You have received the Silver Medal Award for being the best Wikipedia contributor in Asia Month! Keep on editing! Wikipedia Staff
Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 19)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:RyanNavilius5/sandbox 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.
|
Hello! RyanNavilius5,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering 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!
KylieTastic (
talk)
22:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
|
Recent edit to Qin Shi Huang
Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you!
Josvan
Talk
07:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Granny Torrelli Makes Soup
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Granny Torrelli Makes Soup requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CatcherStorm talk 15:14, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit that introduces praise or promotional language to the
Legalism (Chinese philosophy) article. On Wikipedia, we adhere to a
neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid promotional language or puffery. Please read the NPOV policy page, as well as
this page of language to avoid to better understand how to expand this article in a style suitable to an encyclopedia. If you have questions, please see
the Help Desk page. Thank you!
Materialscientist (
talk)
09:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Public forum debate. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the
loss of editing privileges. Thank you.
Nthep (
talk)
15:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Erwin Rommel has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Erwin Rommel was changed by RyanNavilius5 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.891914 on 2018-03-21T00:00:27+00:00 .
Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 00:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with
this edit to
Erwin Rommel. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the
loss of editing privileges. Thank you.
Shellwood (
talk)
00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with
this edit to
Erwin Rommel, you may be
blocked from editing.
Shellwood (
talk)
00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with
this edit to
Erwin Rommel.
Shellwood (
talk)
00:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
I should definitely be unblocked because the state of me being blocked comes from not citing my sources or factual errors. My editors and I will be working on improving our edits for the future.
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:05, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
You have been indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. Vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
RyanNavilius5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I was drunk when I made my vandalistic edits.
Decline reason:
See WP:EBUR, where this is listed fifth on the list. If that's true, then you shouldn't be unblocked as you cannot control yourself when logged into Wikipedia. If it isn't true, then you cannot be trusted to participate in this project in good faith. Either way, you need to remain blocked. I am declining this request. If you choose to address the reason your were blocked and can explain what constructive edits you want to make, you may make another request. 331dot ( talk) 23:52, 31 August 2018 (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.
RyanNavilius5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am very sorry for making vandalistic edits to Wikipedia. I was unaware that Wikipedia required highly credible sources, which resulted in poor quality work.
Decline reason:
Of course you knew that Wikipedia requires credible sources - you have been here long enough and have been blocked enough times to understand that. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 10:28, 7 October 2018 (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.
- Note that prior declined requests cannot be removed while the block is in effect. I have restored one. 331dot ( talk) 09:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Once again you have removed declined unblock requests while you are still blocked, contrary to Wikipedia policy at WP:BLANKING. I advise that if you do it again you might lose access to this talk page. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 07:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
|
Hello, I'm
Flyer22 Reborn. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Transform fault have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page.
Flyer22 Reborn (
talk)
08:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations! You have received the Silver Medal Award for being the best Wikipedia contributor in Asia Month! Keep on editing! Wikipedia Staff
Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 19)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:RyanNavilius5/sandbox 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.
|
|
Hello! RyanNavilius5,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering 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!
KylieTastic (
talk)
22:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
|
Recent edit to Qin Shi Huang
Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you!
Josvan
Talk
07:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Granny Torrelli Makes Soup
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Granny Torrelli Makes Soup requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CatcherStorm talk 15:14, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit that introduces praise or promotional language to the
Legalism (Chinese philosophy) article. On Wikipedia, we adhere to a
neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid promotional language or puffery. Please read the NPOV policy page, as well as
this page of language to avoid to better understand how to expand this article in a style suitable to an encyclopedia. If you have questions, please see
the Help Desk page. Thank you!
Materialscientist (
talk)
09:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Public forum debate. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the
loss of editing privileges. Thank you.
Nthep (
talk)
15:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Erwin Rommel has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Erwin Rommel was changed by RyanNavilius5 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.891914 on 2018-03-21T00:00:27+00:00 .
Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 00:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with
this edit to
Erwin Rommel. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the
loss of editing privileges. Thank you.
Shellwood (
talk)
00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with
this edit to
Erwin Rommel, you may be
blocked from editing.
Shellwood (
talk)
00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with
this edit to
Erwin Rommel.
Shellwood (
talk)
00:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
I should definitely be unblocked because the state of me being blocked comes from not citing my sources or factual errors. My editors and I will be working on improving our edits for the future.
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:05, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
You have been indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. Vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
RyanNavilius5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I was drunk when I made my vandalistic edits.
Decline reason:
See WP:EBUR, where this is listed fifth on the list. If that's true, then you shouldn't be unblocked as you cannot control yourself when logged into Wikipedia. If it isn't true, then you cannot be trusted to participate in this project in good faith. Either way, you need to remain blocked. I am declining this request. If you choose to address the reason your were blocked and can explain what constructive edits you want to make, you may make another request. 331dot ( talk) 23:52, 31 August 2018 (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.
RyanNavilius5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am very sorry for making vandalistic edits to Wikipedia. I was unaware that Wikipedia required highly credible sources, which resulted in poor quality work.
Decline reason:
Of course you knew that Wikipedia requires credible sources - you have been here long enough and have been blocked enough times to understand that. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 10:28, 7 October 2018 (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.
- Note that prior declined requests cannot be removed while the block is in effect. I have restored one. 331dot ( talk) 09:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Once again you have removed declined unblock requests while you are still blocked, contrary to Wikipedia policy at WP:BLANKING. I advise that if you do it again you might lose access to this talk page. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 07:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)