User talk:Krett12
Krett12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I promise to stick to reverting vandalism and other basic things
Decline reason:
Considering how you ignored multiple attempts to reason you in the past, this request is nowhere near to giving me the confidence about unblocking you. Max Semenik (talk) 05:26, 21 February 2016 (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.
Krett12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The only ones that were valid and explained WHY it was wrong were s long time ago
Decline reason:
That is plainly not true. I really like to help people get unblocked, but your failure to even see the problems here means that I can not see any justification for unblocking at this time. There have been many many warnings here, up until this very month, yet you have simply blanked them all before requesting an unblock - I urge you to go back and properly understand them. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:36, 22 February 2016 (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.
So what warnings/issues from admins and other users do you consider "valid", and which ones do you consider invalid then? only (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
I already explained--but I"m willing to do it again. This IS valid. It explains why they consider it wrong in a politely and civilly voiced manner. I responded, and everyone went to bed happy that night. This, in my opinion, is not valid. It doesn't actually explain why, says snarky and sometimes even intimidating thing that I will "be reported" (something that is by itself innapropriate), even though the error I made was fairly minor and definintely was in no was deserving of that.
That clarified enough? Krett12 (talk) 21:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- You just removed the declined unblock requests with the comment "I know it says to not remove unblcok requests but they are taking up a lot of space". That means you clearly know that you must not do that, so do not do it again or you are likely to lose the ability to edit even this talk page. I have to say, this looks like yet another example of you not listening and just going ahead with whatever you personally think is best regardless of Wikipedia policies. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:18, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Okay, but you did not respond to my actual point. Krett12 (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- I thought I had in my decline of your unblock request when I said "There have been many many warnings here, up until this very month, yet you have simply blanked them all before requesting an unblock - I urge you to go back and properly understand them". If you think I am wrong, then please feel free to post a new unblock request and another admin will review it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Do you mind if I put up two? I have two different reasons. Krett12 (talk) 16:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)