User talk:Jopug

January 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Monarchy of the United Kingdom 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. Avoided (talk) 14:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Mr. T, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Powerade, you may be blocked from editing. Rodhull andemu 20:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to You Suck: A Love Story, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: You Suck: A Love Story was changed by Jopug (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.881928 on 2011-03-02T05:16:42+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you create an inappropriate page, as you did at Noah ratcliff, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011[edit]

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Psilocybin mushroom, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. bonadea contributions talk 15:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Prolog (talk) 16:34, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per your email request, I have unblocked this account. Please be aware that any further vandalism will result in a block without a warning. Prolog (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Elizabeth II, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Elizabeth II was changed by Jopug (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.851105 on 2011-10-17T18:37:04+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:37, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Prolog (talk) 18:50, 17 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I apologise that I was using my wikipedia account inappropriately and wish to have appealed so that I may use it for constructive purpoises

Decline reason:

Having looked at the edits which prompted this block, and having reviewed the circumstances of your last block, I am not convinced that allowing you to edit would benefit the encyclopedia. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:11, 8 December 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.

Further inappropriate unblock appeals will result in the loss of your ability to edit this page, and will seriously compromise any future chances of being unblocked. (Context) Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 20:01, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to request that my wikipedia account be unblocked. The past unblock request posted from my account was not done so by myself, and therefore I feel that I cannot be held responsible for said vandalism. I believe that in the event my request is approved, I may further the idea behind WikiPedia, by making relevant and accurate edits, pages and suggestions as I have done in the past (See Canadian Victory Nickel). I see that the destructive purposes I previously used my account for are immature and will not be useful in any way to myself or the collective users of Wikipedia, and shall not be repeated. I genuinely hope that this unblock request is taken seriously and would like to extend my sincere apologies for any past vandalism. Yours, Jopug

Decline reason:

You are always 100% responsible for any edits. WP:GOTHACKED apparently applies (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:27, 4 December 2012 (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.

Account Unblocking[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to request that my wikipedia account be unblocked. The past unblock request posted from my account was not done so by myself, and therefore I feel that I cannot be held responsible for said vandalism. I believe that in the event my request is approved, I may further the idea behind WikiPedia, by making relevant and accurate edits, pages and suggestions as I have done in the past (See Canadian Victory Nickel). I see that the destructive purposes I previously used my account for are immature and will not be useful in any way to myself or the collective users of Wikipedia, and shall not be repeated. I genuinely hope that this unblock request is taken seriously and would like to extend my sincere apologies for any past vandalism. Yours, Jopug PS I am aware that I should have been more careful with my account and will vigilantly do so in the future. Jopug (talk) 22:40, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

you have explicitly stated that another person has had access to your account. Therefore WP:GOTHACKED applies, as was stated above, and you cannot be unblocked. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 23:06, 4 December 2012 (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.

Account Block Repeal Request[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I would like to request that my wikipedia account be unblocked. I believe that in the event my request is approved, I may further the idea behind WikiPedia, by making relevant and accurate edits, pages and suggestions as I have done in the past (See Canadian Victory Nickel). I see that the destructive purposes I previously used my account for are immature and will not be useful in any way to myself or the collective users of Wikipedia, and shall not be repeated. I genuinely hope that this unblock request is taken seriously and would like to extend my sincere apologies for any past vandalism. Yours, Jopug Jopug (talk) 23:55, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

What part of the previous unblock denials didn't you understand? Actually, to be honest, a more productive inquiry might be what part you did. Because we said more than once: we're not unblocking your account. Ever. Period. Because you told us it was compromised. Since you have so willfully refused to get this, you will not be making any more unblock requests as I will be extending the block to this page. Good-bye. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 5 December 2012 (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.

Re: Account Unblock[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

I would now like to admit that i lied in regards to another person accessing my account, i was screwing around and now regret it. I promise that no events such as this shall occur in the future and would like to also request how to unblock my ip address so i may create a new account, this one for constructive purposes only, in the event that it is not possible in any way to unblock my current one. Jopug (talk) 00:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Notwithstanding the above, fool us once, shame on you; fool us twice, shame on us. You now say you lied about the account being compromised? Only after we repeatedly told you in no uncertain terms that that disclosure meant we would block the account forever did it come to your mind to confess this. That were too temptingly commodious, Count!. Frankly, while your account may or may not be compromised, your ethics certainly are ... and that's good enough reason to keep you from editing Wikipedia from now until the last supermasssive black holes evaporate. Oh, and I'm still cutting off your talk page. Cheers. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 5 December 2012 (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.