User talk:BJWrwandb

Welcome!

Hello, BJWrwandb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jenks24 (talk) 12:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of multiple accounts

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Being a sock of Brian Beahr. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. EdJohnston (talk) 16:39, 19 August 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Blocked for no reason - someone reverted edits back to blatantly factually incorrect information - St Kildas club name is not Hawthorn and never will be - this is beyond rediculous - whoever bklocked that has blocked me for putting factual information and revert6ed it back to factually incorrect information that they probably put there - I am not using multiple accountsBJWrwandb (talk) 02:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Looks like a duck to me Beeblebrox (talk) 05:26, 20 August 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am not using multiple accounts and am not editing on behalf of another user. I resent being blocked for factual edits after someone has reverted those edits back to factually incorrect information. 'It looks like a duck to me' isnt a valid response to an unblock request

Decline reason:

I'm going to start from the bottom: seeing as the word "duck" links to an article that defines what WP:DUCK means, it's a very valid response: behaviourally, you were acting like a previously blocked user - therefore, as per WP:EVADE, you got blocked too - this should cover your first point as well. To address the second: you are not blocked for putting in "factual" information - indeed, we care less for facts, and more for reliably sourced information. We also have a process for helping gain consensus. Every time you see a link, read it. Here's your final link: the guide to appealing blocks (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:21, 20 August 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

being blocked for putting factually correct information by someone who then reverts the article back to factually incorrect information is not acceptible

Decline reason:

Again, you were blocked for sockpuppetry. Please understand that misuse of the unblock template will result in the loss of your ability to edit this page. Tiderolls 04:42, 22 August 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

testy? i am not a sock puppet and being blocked for editing and adding factually correct information by someone who then reverts that back to factually incorrect information up to a dozen times is not acceptable

Decline reason:

You are making the exact same unblock requests as the account you used before that. Your talk page editing privileges have been revoked. –MuZemike 05:34, 27 August 2010 (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.