User talk:KingAttack!: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
declining with rationales - warned to not abuse unblock process further
Line 261: Line 261:
{{unblock reviewed | 1=I made an edit and I forgot to put in a source. I know that sources are needed. I will remember to add sources. [[User:KingAttack!|KingAttack!]] ([[User talk:KingAttack!#top|talk]]) 11:33, 8 September 2019 (UTC) | decline = If you had forgotten to add a source with one edit, you would not be blocked. You have not added sources with several of your edits. You will need to better indicate that you understand [[WP:V|verifiability]] before you can be unblocked. Additionally, you have not addressed your failure to communicate with other editors or lack of otherwise explaining your edits in edit summaries or talk pages. Right now, there is not a benefit to Wikipedia in unblocking you, and as such I am declining your request. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 11:46, 8 September 2019 (UTC)}}
{{unblock reviewed | 1=I made an edit and I forgot to put in a source. I know that sources are needed. I will remember to add sources. [[User:KingAttack!|KingAttack!]] ([[User talk:KingAttack!#top|talk]]) 11:33, 8 September 2019 (UTC) | decline = If you had forgotten to add a source with one edit, you would not be blocked. You have not added sources with several of your edits. You will need to better indicate that you understand [[WP:V|verifiability]] before you can be unblocked. Additionally, you have not addressed your failure to communicate with other editors or lack of otherwise explaining your edits in edit summaries or talk pages. Right now, there is not a benefit to Wikipedia in unblocking you, and as such I am declining your request. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 11:46, 8 September 2019 (UTC)}}


{{unblock|reason=I've made over 30 edits in the last six months and only this one edit did I forget to add a source. I'm trying hard to remember to add sources and I'm going to try harder in the future. [[User:KingAttack!|KingAttack!]] ([[User talk:KingAttack!#top|talk]]) 18:30, 8 September 2019 (UTC)}}
{{unblock reviewed | 1=I've made over 30 edits in the last six months and only this one edit did I forget to add a source. I'm trying hard to remember to add sources and I'm going to try harder in the future. [[User:KingAttack!|KingAttack!]] ([[User talk:KingAttack!#top|talk]]) 2:30 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4) | decline = See decline below. '''[[User:NJA|<em style="font-family:Arial;color:#6600CC">N.J.A.</em>]]''' <small> &#124; [[User_talk:NJA|<span style="color:#63D1F4">talk</span>]]</small> 10:59, 9 September 2019 (UTC)}}
*The warnings on your talk page date from <s>2017</s> 2016 warning you of your failure to use sources. You have generally failed to properly source your changes and otherwise explain what you were doing in an edit summary. You also ignored warnings given to you. You only came to discuss things when you were blocked indefinitely. I would deny this request unless assurances are given with evidence of example changes you want to make along with proper sources to see how capable and serious you are at contributing positively. '''[[User:NJA|<em style="font-family:Arial;color:#6600CC">N.J.A.</em>]]''' <small> &#124; [[User_talk:NJA|<span style="color:#63D1F4">talk</span>]]</small> 19:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
*The warnings on your talk page date from <s>2017</s> 2016 warning you of your failure to use sources. You have generally failed to properly source your changes and otherwise explain what you were doing in an edit summary. You also ignored warnings given to you. You only came to discuss things when you were blocked indefinitely. I would deny this request unless assurances are given with evidence of example changes you want to make along with proper sources to see how capable and serious you are at contributing positively. '''[[User:NJA|<em style="font-family:Arial;color:#6600CC">N.J.A.</em>]]''' <small> &#124; [[User_talk:NJA|<span style="color:#63D1F4">talk</span>]]</small> 19:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)


{{unblock reviewed | 1=reason=The warnings from 2016 were before I knew sources were necessary, and then I was blocked and that was when I learned my lesson. The edit summaries are optional. [[User:KingAttack!|KingAttack!]] ([[User talk:KingAttack!#top|talk]]) 19:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC) | decline= User is further indicating that they are not here to contribute positively. They are either trolling or oblivious to the reality that they’ve been warned countless times on sources both before and after the previous block. No lesson was learned by them following the previous block or subsequent warnings. No attempt for them to discuss their editing by those warning them until they were finally blocked. As for edit summaries, while they can be optional, they are not where it may be unclear the rationale for the changes. Not providing citations and having a history of poor editing is when any discretionary use of an edit summary becomes a requirement. Regardless edit summaries are not the main reason for the block, it is part of a pattern of issues. User is warned that access to this page may be removed if they request another unblock without actually addressing the issues with their behaviour, along with, as suggested above, providing examples of edits they’d like to make along with proper sources and an example edit summary to evidence an ability to edit in a positive manner perhaps with restrictions placed on their edits until they’ve demonstrated an ability to do so without supervision. '''[[User:NJA|<em style="font-family:Arial;color:#6600CC">N.J.A.</em>]]''' <small> &#124; [[User_talk:NJA|<span style="color:#63D1F4">talk</span>]]</small> 10:59, 9 September 2019 (UTC)}}
{{unblock|reason=The warnings from 2016 were before I knew sources were necessary, and then I was blocked and that was when I learned my lesson. The edit summaries are optional. [[User:KingAttack!|KingAttack!]] ([[User talk:KingAttack!#top|talk]]) 19:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)}}

Revision as of 10:59, 9 September 2019

Welcome

Hello, KingAttack!, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! - theWOLFchild 10:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

May 2016

Information icon Hello, I'm Wani. Your recent edit to the page List of Epic Rap Battles of History episodes appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Wani (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Box Office

Hello, I saw that you made a edit on 2017 in film page, I undid the edition because Monster Trucks has already premiered in France & UK in december 2016, according to the Box Office Mojo source, therefor is not valid for the 2017 list. DCF94 (talk) 16:39, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, KingAttack!. 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]

February 2017

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Shinedown discography, without citing a reliable source using an inline citation that clearly supports the material. The burden is on the person wishing to keep in the material to meet these requirements, as a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Mlpearc (open channel) 19:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to List of films based on video games. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - Mlpearc (open channel) 19:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Superfast. 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) 09:57, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Green Day discography

Please do not add more columns than the recommended limit of 10 (per WP:DISCOGSTYLE and established conventions), as you did at Green Day discography. Any more than this artificially widens the page and can cause readability issues for readers, as the text has to decrease in size to accommodate the additional columns. Besides this, discographies are not meant to be repositories of all peaks achieved for a musical act. Also, if you can avoid it, please try to avoid editing discographies while using Visual Edit; it messes up the lines of peaks. Thank you. Ss112 11:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Evil discography

It appears that you added a blank "Music Videos" section to Pop Evil discography. Can you please elaborate on this? --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Information icon Thanks for contributing to the article Pop Evil discography. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable, by being clearly attributed to reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). Thanks! P.S. If you need any help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Dunkirk (2017 film), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. The Old JacobiteThe '45 00:10, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Vessels (Starset album). - FlightTime (open channel) 00:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, KingAttack!. 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]

December 2017

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Skillet discography does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → check Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. What should I make of this blanking? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Information icon Thanks for contributing to the article Pop Evil discography. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable, by being clearly attributed to reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). Thanks! P.S. If you need any help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:43, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Information icon Thanks for contributing to the article Ded (band) . However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable, by being clearly attributed to reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). Thanks! P.S. If you need any help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Evil discography

Information icon Hello, I'm Jax 0677. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Pop Evil discography, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Falling in Reverse discography

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Falling in Reverse discography, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wild Cards books and short stories

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of Wild Cards books and short stories, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Pop Evil discography. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Honest Trailers episodes

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Honest Trailers episodes. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding adding unreferenced material to articles. The thread is User KingAttack! has added material to several Wikipedia pages without proper referencing. The discussion is about the topic referencing. Jax 0677 (talk) 15:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
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 ~~~~}}.  —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:55, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please update the dates when you update music charts

Good day! Please update the reference access dates when you update music charts. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:23, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Blade Runner 2049, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. The Old JacobiteThe '45 13:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Johnny English (film series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Davies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Blade Runner 2049, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. The Old JacobiteThe '45 12:30, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Letters from the Fire

Information icon Thanks for contributing to the article Letters from the Fire. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). Thanks! P.S. If you need further help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to K.Flay does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → check Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Ss112 08:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you stop blanking the chart positions on K.Flay? What are you doing? Ss112 11:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Chart positions do not only go on the primary artist's page. I don't know where you ever got that idea from. Any artist on the song can have chart positions for that song on their own page. Ss112 00:34, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Honest Trailers episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Quiet Place (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, KingAttack!. 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]

February 2019

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Bad Wolves, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Ss112 11:14, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Evil discography

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Pop Evil discography. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Kodak Black discography. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:16, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Mötley Crüe discography. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

You are being reported for persistent addition of unsourced content. You have been given multiple warnings for this, including two final ones, but have just done so yet again on Bad Wolves. Are you going to stop at all? Do you not feel you need to provide sources for what you add to Wikipedia, despite the fact WP:V is our most basic policy? Ss112 12:03, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
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 ~~~~}}.

N.J.A. | talk 13:33, 4 September 2019 (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).

KingAttack! (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I made an edit and I forgot to put in a source. I know that sources are needed. I will remember to add sources. KingAttack! (talk) 11:33, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you had forgotten to add a source with one edit, you would not be blocked. You have not added sources with several of your edits. You will need to better indicate that you understand verifiability before you can be unblocked. Additionally, you have not addressed your failure to communicate with other editors or lack of otherwise explaining your edits in edit summaries or talk pages. Right now, there is not a benefit to Wikipedia in unblocking you, and as such I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 8 September 2019 (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.

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).

KingAttack! (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I've made over 30 edits in the last six months and only this one edit did I forget to add a source. I'm trying hard to remember to add sources and I'm going to try harder in the future. KingAttack! (talk) 2:30 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4)

Decline reason:

See decline below. N.J.A. | talk 10:59, 9 September 2019 (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.

  • The warnings on your talk page date from 2017 2016 warning you of your failure to use sources. You have generally failed to properly source your changes and otherwise explain what you were doing in an edit summary. You also ignored warnings given to you. You only came to discuss things when you were blocked indefinitely. I would deny this request unless assurances are given with evidence of example changes you want to make along with proper sources to see how capable and serious you are at contributing positively. N.J.A. | talk 19:12, 8 September 2019 (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).

KingAttack! (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

reason=The warnings from 2016 were before I knew sources were necessary, and then I was blocked and that was when I learned my lesson. The edit summaries are optional. KingAttack! (talk) 19:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

User is further indicating that they are not here to contribute positively. They are either trolling or oblivious to the reality that they’ve been warned countless times on sources both before and after the previous block. No lesson was learned by them following the previous block or subsequent warnings. No attempt for them to discuss their editing by those warning them until they were finally blocked. As for edit summaries, while they can be optional, they are not where it may be unclear the rationale for the changes. Not providing citations and having a history of poor editing is when any discretionary use of an edit summary becomes a requirement. Regardless edit summaries are not the main reason for the block, it is part of a pattern of issues. User is warned that access to this page may be removed if they request another unblock without actually addressing the issues with their behaviour, along with, as suggested above, providing examples of edits they’d like to make along with proper sources and an example edit summary to evidence an ability to edit in a positive manner perhaps with restrictions placed on their edits until they’ve demonstrated an ability to do so without supervision. N.J.A. | talk 10:59, 9 September 2019 (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.