Jump to content

User talk:TrEeMaNsHoE

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TrEeMaNsHoE (talk | contribs) at 04:14, 3 November 2009 (→Block). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Fantasy Ride

do you have proof that ciara has:

  1. recorded a song called bubblegum?
  2. she has collaborated with lil-wayne?
  3. she is releasing it on april 8?

if you can prove these things then "Bubblegum" just cannot be listed in the article. Wikipedia is a factual encyclopedia not fansite for opions. if you can provide a web reference and/or source then i have no problem with leaving it in. but without it cannot be in the article. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 18:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Please consider your edits in co-ordinance with WP:albums, it is not appropriate for tables to be used when there is not enough information to fill them. Tracklist tables SHOULD NOT contain duplicated information. Your edits deliberately go against wikipedia rules and to get your own way (as you dont have enough information to fill the table) you are writing the same people in the production and writers columns. I would like to know what your sources are for the track-listing considering the official album booklet is not available yet? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 19
56, 25 April 2009 (UTC))

That might be so i take your point on board, but both myself and other users removed the table because there is not enough information for it to be filled in correctly. your constant revisions are counter-productive. IF more information becomes available we can consider using the template show in the article "In A Perfect World..." (Lil-unique1 (talk) 19:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Track Listing

Please read wikipedia rules at WP:albums, WP:Crystal and WP:References. You will find that an album should only have one track-listing (more than one is permissable for different market releases i.e. UK release etc.). you will also find that rapbasement.com by nature is a fansite and therefore NOT a verifiable source. They cannot say where they have got their information from. Amazon, Target and Play all get their information from record labels. Therefore as much as we would like rapbasement's track listing to be true we have to assume it false because it is just a fansite. In reality the track listing could change once again but the likes of Amazon and Target are more representative of being verifiable because both have contact with record labels. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 19:35, 4 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Like A Surgeon/Work

Can i point out that neither "Like A Surgeon" nor "Work" have been officially released nor confirmed for release. That is why the single pages were deleted because wikipedia is not crystal ball WP:crystal. Also according to WP:citations twitter, myspace, youtube etc. are not verifiable sources regardless. Therefore unless you can provide an official and WP:verifiable source for the dual release the information can and will be removed/challenged. Even if twitter was allowed as a source all Ciara mentioned, quote "i know what my next single is" - there is no mention of dual release. Please do not make reverts. Plus remember to provide a WP:edit summary. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Work/Third Single

Oh dear this is becomming oh too much of a habit, myself or another user having to point out factual inaccuracies in your edits. Ciara's twitter says "its time to go and 'work'" this in no way confirms the release of "work" as the third single. All that Twitter confirms is that ciara knows what her next single is and she met Melina to discuss the video for her as of yet undisclosed third single. Please wait until it specifically says "next single is...". Trying to foreshadow a single like this is a breach of wikipedia rules according to WP:crystal not to mention a factual inaccuracy. Recreation of deleted pages is also a breach of rules according to WP:speedy deletion. If and when the release is confirmed the page can be recreated but as of yet it has been nominated for speedy deletion.

I would like to draw your attention to several rule pages to prevent future messages like this. You seem to have trouble understanding how to use wikipedia accurately so take a look at: WP:Crystal,
*WP:albums,
*WP:verifiable,
*WP:notability,
*WP:good faith
this is also the third time you have been asked to provide a WP:edit summary please do not fail to do so again.(Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Tell Me What Your Name is/Fourth Single

Recently i reverted some edits that you made to Fantasy Ride where you removed "Like a Surgeon" as a single and added "Tell Me What Your Name is". First of all i did the same thing much earlier in the year but my American Wikipedians (i am a UK wikipedian) informed me that billboard sources state that "Like a Surgeon" was indeed released as a radio/digitaldownload only single but never the less was released fully as a single.

Additionally i would like to know where your evidence is that "Tell Me What your name is" is going to be the next international single. Personally i think it is an excellent choice and i hope it is true but can i check on what basis are you making this statement? i knw that some versions of the album where shipped with a sticker on the packaging that actually said "Fantasy Ride including the song 'Tell Me What Your name is'". the last time this happened under Jive Records was with Britney Spears album Circus which mentioned "If You Seek Amy" and therefore that song was released as a single. were you assuming the same? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Fantasy Ride track listing format

Could you explain why you keep reverting edits by other users regarding the use of bullet lists and the {{tracklist}} template? Also, would you happen to edit under the IP 67.38.6.46? — Σxplicit 23:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Fantasy Ride. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. — Σxplicit 23:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Turntables (song)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Turntables (song), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-charting song, not verified as a single. Fails WP:NM.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. — Σxplicit 02:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy Ride - Speculation

here is some friendly advise from a fellow wikipedia editor.

  1. purpose of wikipedia is not provide encylcopedic information - that means FACTUAL.
  2. wikipedia rules clearly state that information should be sourced or referenced.

On a number of occassions you have made edits to FANASTY RIDE without provide references or undone edits which were satisfied wikipedia quality standards for edits which didnt.

This is counter-productive. Writing speculation and such as "work is intended to to be the third single" is completely irrelevant and infactual therefore has no place in the article. As a fan i have to admit that i hope "work" does get a release but PLEASE wait until it is officially announced as a single. Writing it in the discography and article before confirmation breaches wikipedia's policy of verifiability. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Please consider your edits in co-ordinance with WP:albums, it is not appropriate for tables to be used when there is not enough information to fill them. Tracklist tables SHOULD NOT contain duplicated information. Your edits deliberately go against wikipedia rules and to get your own way (as you dont have enough information to fill the table) you are writing the same people in the production and writers columns. I would like to know what your sources are for the track-listing considering the official album booklet is not available yet? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 19
56, 25 April 2009 (UTC))

Speedy deletion of Physical Education (album)

A tag has been placed on Physical Education (album), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Σxplicit 18:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Physical Education (album), a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. — Σxplicit 19:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to D-Girl. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Chain Letter (album).   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. You've been warned quite enough times for your edits. Your continuous reverts of other users edits are breaching our edit warring policy. Please discuss issues on talk pages instead of reverting edits without discussion and using no edit summary. You do not own any articles. Further disruption with will result in a block. — Σxplicit 20:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is adding that table vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by TrEeMaNsHoE (talk • contribs) 21:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your continuous reverts of other people's edits to fit your criteria is the problem. Other edits explain why they revert your edits, which are backed by a guideline or policy. You simply revert without saying a word. As I explained before, a table of full release dates of singles do not belong on the article album, but on the article about the single. You're adding excessively detailed information that can easily fit into the proper article, but you just revert and continue to ignore any and all warnings you've received. — Σxplicit 21:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Etiquette

Hello, Please can i ask that in the interest of courtesy and for ease of understanding when making edits like you have done to Fantasy Ride can you provide an WP:edit summary. this helps other editors identify what changes have been made to articles. I know myself that sometimes i forget to do so, but it does make things easier for other users if you can provide a brief summary of the additions/deletions or changes you have made to an article. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]


Hello, this is your second reminder about Edit summaries. It is considered a breach of wikipedia rules not to use the box provided to inform other editors about what additions/changes/edits you have made to an article. please in the future can you use the feature. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Reply

The place to ask for that is at WP:RFPP. Cirt (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking redirects

Please refrain from breaking redirects to articles of non-notable singles, as you did with Like a Surgeon (Ciara song) and Work (song). These articles are redirected because they fail to pass our notability guideline: WP:NM. As is specifically states here, Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. All these songs don't meet our inclusion criteria, and therefore must redirect to Fantasy Ride. Please consider this your final warning. — Σxplicit 21:11, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion concerning your editing pattern is up for discussion in WP:ANI. The thread can be found here. — Σxplicit 21:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Creating misspelled page at Work ( Ciara song) to get around protection of Work (Ciara song).. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Cirt (talk) 03:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremih (album)

Hey there, I noticed you added a few songs to the "Confirmed tracks" section in Jeremih (album). Looking at the source you provided, neither song is listed. Could you clarify? — Σxplicit 20:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you can remove them from the confifmed tracks list, but as you can see, they are singles. By, the way are you authorized to unprotect pages, because Like a Surgeon (Ciara song) has become a notable song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TrEeMaNsHoE (talk • contribs) 20:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remove the tracks shortly until they are verifiable. As I am not an administrator, I can not unprotect pages. I did, however, leave a note at WP:RPP and verified that "Like a Surgeon" has charted. It should be unprotected shortly. — Σxplicit 20:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re Like a Surgeon (Ciara song)

Please wait for the request to be processed one way or the other, at WP:RFPP. Cirt (talk) 22:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maintenance tags

Stop removing the maintenance tags from articles, as you did with Ciara. I specifically stated here why those tags are placed in the article and they have yet to be resolved. Your edits are becoming disruptive once again, and you will lead yourself into another block for a longer time period. Please discuss the issues on the talk page before edit warring. (Automated note: Please make sure to reply here on your talk page, as I have it on my watchlist. Thank you.) — Σxplicit 20:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Pop 100 number-one hits of 2005 (USA), you will be blocked from editing. - eo (talk) 16:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fake/false information - ALL edits reverted + block

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 2 weeks as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. - eo (talk) 16:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled (R Kelly album)

why did you feel it necessary to revert my edits to this page? in none of the sources does it mention that ciara appears on the track echo. in fact it is not even mentioned that Flo rida appears on rewind, so that should be removed too. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]


Proposed deletion of Fourth Studio Album (Ciara album)

The article Fourth Studio Album (Ciara album) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lacks 3rd party sources, lacks a title, lacks referenced tracklist. Might be notable one day but not today. See WP:HAMMER

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 03:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Fourth Studio Album (Ciara album)

I have nominated Fourth Studio Album (Ciara album), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fourth Studio Album (Ciara album). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Tim Song (talk) 04:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Style

You have been asked before and you will be asked again:

  1. please provide a WP:edit summary when making edits to an article as this helps other users establish exactly what contribution you have made to an article.
  2. please use the "show preview" button to view your edits before clicking "submit" because this will allow you to see exactly how your edits will turn out.
  3. if you are making large/major constructions to a page such as those to Ciara discography then use the WP:Sandbox or WP:userspace to create the change without disruption and once perfected you can copy it into said desired article.

The purpose of stages 2 and 3 is to prevent the user history of a page becomming bogged/clogged with one users edits and revisions of his/her own work. Thanks. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Work/charts

Im afraid that the use of Trendcharts to show that Ciara's "Work" reached number 2 is unacceptable. If the chart changes every week and is not archived you cannot use it as a source to 'prove' that the song reached that position. In a sense you could claim that the song reached any position on the chart but no one else would be able to verify that. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 13:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Fourth Studio Albums/speculation/ciara

Hello, I've been monitoring your edits (and reverting where appropriate) for the last few days. When an album is yet untitled as is Ciara's fourth studio album e.g. it doesnt have a title and there is no support for such albums to have their own pages. This is clearly outlined at WP:TenPoundHammer's Law. You have been previously warned about creating pages for as of yet unconfirmed or speculative titles.

If you are ever in doubt if you have created an article too soon or before creating articles in the future please take a look at WP:Crystal. I will be creating the outline for the album on my own user page, if you create sections on your own user page i will be happy to include them in my skeleton article which will then be fully created when more details are available.

Furthermore under these circumstances you should not refer to an album as untitled (a large number of albums have this as their official album title) and definately should not put links for such albums into related articles. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, TrEeMaNsHoE.
Since the new article about Ciara's supposed upcoming album did not contain anything that would make a new AfD turn out differently than the last one, I have deleted it as a recreation.
An article about an upcoming, untitled album needs really at least the following things:
  1. An officially confirmed and reliable release date in the very near future, or
  2. enough in-depth coverage in reliable sources to have shown encyclopedic notability
It still might be better placed in a section of the artist's article. In the case at hand, I'd urge you to not recreate the article unless the situation changes significantly. Please include information of encyclopedic noteworthiness in the artist's article until then.
Thank you, Amalthea 00:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ciara discography

You cannot continue to revert this article. Your revision contains many claims of sales figures with no sources whatsoever. Your revision also messes up the tables and the centering of the information in the columns. If you are in the process of "moving the refs" then I don't understand why you would also remove the {{inuse}} template at the top of the page. If you are going to do a major overhaul on an article you should first make edits on a subpage of your own and gain consensus, especially when doing it to an article that has already been cleaned up and has been in good condition for a long period of time. - eo (talk) 01:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This edit summary [1] is also false: Lil Unique's last edit to the page looks like my version, not yours. None of the discography edits I've seen Lil Unique work on resemble yours, you cannot place various sales figure claims in the article without any sources. - eo (talk) 01:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ciara discography, you will be blocked from editing. - eo (talk) 01:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Ciara discography. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. - eo (talk) 01:32, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Template:Do not delete

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, fellow wikipedia editor. A couple months prior to this, I was blocked for not following wikipedia criteria. I learned my lesson, however, and studied the criteria. I recently looked at WP: discography to learn how a discography should be fomated. I applied the concepts to Ciara discography, however, someone kept reverting them. I kept telling them that that was how the guidelines should be, but they still kept reverting my edits. Eventually they blocked me. Thank you for taking the time to read my appeal. I respect any decision you make.

Decline reason:

Actually, you were blocked for abusively operating multiple accounts. That is the issue which you would need to address in your unblock request. TNXMan 22:48, 29 October 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, I was recently blocked for trying to do something under multple acounts. I am sorry for doing this, as I did not know you couldn't and promise I won't do it again. Next time, if someone rejects my edits, I will put them on my talk page for an administrator to look at. I am hoping that you accept my sincere appology and allow me to resume editing. I respect whatever choice you make. Sorry I forgot to sign the edit. Oh, now I see what you mean. This is the smae user.--TrEeMaNsHoE (talk) 23:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

What edits do you plan to make if you would be unblocked? \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 03:22, 3 November 2009 (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.

I didn't mean right now, I meant to continue being a wikipedia editor as a generalization. Sorry if you mistakened me.--TrEeMaNsHoE (talk) 04:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Hello, I was recently blocked for trying to do something under multple acounts. I am sorry for doing this, as I did not know you couldn't and promise I won't do it again. Next time, if someone rejects my edits, I will put them on my talk page for an administrator to look at. I am hoping that you accept my sincere appology and allow me to resume editing. I respect whatever choice you make. I hope to continue being a wikipedia editor

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Hello, I was recently blocked for trying to do something under multple acounts. I am sorry for doing this, as I did not know you couldn't and promise I won't do it again. Next time, if someone rejects my edits, I will put them on my talk page for an administrator to look at. I am hoping that you accept my sincere appology and allow me to resume editing. I respect whatever choice you make. I hope to continue being a wikipedia editor |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello, I was recently blocked for trying to do something under multple acounts. I am sorry for doing this, as I did not know you couldn't and promise I won't do it again. Next time, if someone rejects my edits, I will put them on my talk page for an administrator to look at. I am hoping that you accept my sincere appology and allow me to resume editing. I respect whatever choice you make. I hope to continue being a wikipedia editor |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Hello, I was recently blocked for trying to do something under multple acounts. I am sorry for doing this, as I did not know you couldn't and promise I won't do it again. Next time, if someone rejects my edits, I will put them on my talk page for an administrator to look at. I am hoping that you accept my sincere appology and allow me to resume editing. I respect whatever choice you make. I hope to continue being a wikipedia editor |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TrEeMaNsHoE&oldid=323623196"