User talk:Candycreamqq

November 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Alexf^(talk) 17:24, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

This is your last warning.Your recent test edits to WP:Sandbox were not constructive. It was vandalism and was reverted. Entry of false information is not helpful. If you want to experiment or make a test edit, please use the sandbox. These pages are patrolled by robots and human editors like me. When you make an edit please leave an accurate edit summary, and not a misleading one. You can be blocked for this. It appears that your account is being used for Vandalism only, and you are not here to build an encyclopedia. Further vandalism will get you blocked from editing without further notice. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:25, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The obscene nature of your repeated insertion of images required that WP:AIV be notified before I posted the warning. You were willful, stubborn and obscene. Your transgressions makes the indefinite block the right thing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I was testing some images in the sandbox. I did not do anything wrong. If I was violating the rules why was I not given sotme kind of warning? I was blocked then a warning was posted. Somethings not adding up here

Decline reason:

The images you were "testing" were obscene and were gross violations of wikipedia policy. If you ask again for an unblock, make it clear that you understand what you did wrong. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:42, 9 November 2019 (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.

Not to mention, this is a block evasion of user:Bussy4life . CLCStudent (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Bussy4life (talk · contribs · logs).
Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

-- The Anome (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]