User talk:Rahio1234

This is Rahio1234's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Rahio1234 reported by User:Ergzay (Result: ). Thank you. Ergzay (talk) 11:06, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using {{One source}} and {{More citations needed}} templates in Twinkle on stub pages

Hi Rahio1234, I reverted several of your changes on several stub pages where you added citation templates. As the instructions on {{one source}} state:

Citing only one source is not a violation of any policy.  Consider not adding this tag to stubs, articles that are being actively expanded, or articles that have no apparent problems with verifiability and neutrality.

I would suggest that you not add those templates to stub pages that don't seem to have obvious issues with their verifiability or neutrality. Those pages need to be expanded, not have additional sources added for their already slim content. Ergzay (talk) 15:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harrassment

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's harassment policy, as you did at User:Ergzay, you may be blocked from editing. Your recent edits [1] [2] on my user page, blanking it and then reverting it are harrasment. Do not do that. Ergzay (talk) 16:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Ergzay (talk) 17:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, What happened Rahio 1234 07:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your user talk page (this page) is not the forum to discuss an issue that is at WP:ANI. If you don't know what happened (but you do know what happened), you can look at WP:ANI, and you should look at WP:ANI anyway. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 14:43, 9 June 2024 (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).

Rahio1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedians I have been blocked for some reason. Please unblock my account, Rahio 1234 15:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Bbb23 (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2024 (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).

Rahio1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Actually i'm not disrupt wikipeia it. Rahio 1234 07:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you don't think that you were disruptive, there are no grounds to remove the block. 331dot (talk) 07:29, 14 June 2024 (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.

Final unblock request

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).

Rahio1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please note i'm not disrupt the wikipedia. and vandalize it Rahio 1234 11:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Not only is this not convincing, but Confirmed extensive logged-out editing, including to evade this block, in violation of WP:LOUTSOCK. Yamla (talk) 12:07, 19 June 2024 (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).

Rahio1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Decline reason:

That's quite enough. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:05, 20 June 2024 (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.

Please don't decline my unblock Rahio 1234 07:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not permitted to edit or remove declined unblock requests for your currently active block. If you do so again, you will lose access to your talk page. You get no further warnings about this. --Yamla (talk) 09:18, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla Why. i have create a new account and sockpuppet? Rahio 1234 09:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is incoherent. --Yamla (talk) 09:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla Can you look into his claim that he's created a separate account and a sockpuppet account? Ergzay (talk) 01:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No CU evidence for that at this time. --Yamla (talk) 09:59, 21 June 2024 (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).

Rahio1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Don't revoke my TPA Rahio 1234 09:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; you already have an open unblock request, it's abusive to make a second simultaneous open unblock request. Additionally, this isn't providing any reason for the block to be lifted. Don't do this again. Yamla (talk) 09:36, 20 June 2024 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.