User talk:Aca rblx
May 2017[edit]
Hello, I'm Ebyabe. An edit that you recently made to Roblox seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! ‖ Ebyabe talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 09:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Your recent edits[edit]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or 
) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
youtube[edit]
Hello. We do not link to youtube. Thanks.15:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
--DO NOT VIOLATE PRIVACY!
LOL[edit]
Abusing multiple accounts is not about privacy. It's about violating your terms of use.Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:10, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
October 2017[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
Aca rblx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi, I've been blocked as "abusively using this account" after participating in a deletion discussion where my comments from were repeatedly deleted. Where is the freedom of speech? Also just because I have commented on an article that is being deleted made by a blocked user doesn't make me complicit in anything at all. The article which is now deleted, I strongly feel should NOT have been deleted but people kept deleting my comments and it ends up getting a travesty of a deletion discussion. This is the page i am talking about: Eren Bülbül I am quite honestly offended because the boy that the article is about is a martyr who died at the hands of terrorist after a very heroic deed that may well have saved many lives. People should definitely know who he is. And YES there has been plenty of coverage of him in from many many different news sources Turkish and International, the boy has a school named after him and was even featured in a popular television show. He died months ago but there are even still new articles being written about him. The clash in which he died, which he was not the only martyr in, also does not have its own article, the more the reason for the article on Eren Bulbul to exist. This boy is solidly and undoubtedly notable. Virtually any Turk you ask will know who Eren Bulbul is. He is VERY well known and also notable in this sense. I am also extremely frustrated that the article was deleted at the whim of two people who couldn't even be bothered to read the article. And that the admin apparently just looked at that two people said delete, and didn't look further into it weather what those two users said actually held any credibility.
Decline reason:
As you well know, you have been blocked as a sock puppet of prolific sockmaster User:Finley22 Waterman based on technical checkuser evidence. This is not a serious unblock appeal and is simply a vehicle to argue over a deleted article and thus I am revoking your talk page access. Unblock requests can now only be made at WP:UTRS. Just Chilling (talk) 00:32, 22 October 2017 (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.
Aca rblx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #19567 was submitted on Oct 22, 2017 01:00:55. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 01:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Aca rblx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #19575 was submitted on Oct 22, 2017 14:40:38. This review is now closed.