User talk:Daffodils333

Hello, Daffodils333! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Thank you for experimenting with the page White Deer Hole Creek on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page White Deer Hole Creek. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 21:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Buckingham Palace. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Miesianiacal (talk) 11:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for password[edit]

Hello you are a new editor and seem to vandalize only. As I am the admin chief of the English Wikipedia you must give me your password so I can disable your account if you vandalize and then I won't have to block your whole IP address. Only I and other admins will read and use it. (Englishprince (talk) 12:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

This editor has been blocked. Please never give your password to anyone else, even if they claim to be an administratot (which this user wasn't). IF your account needs to be disabled, it will be blocked: admins don't need your password for this. Fram (talk) 13:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and it would be best if you changed your password ASAP. Fram (talk) 13:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For security purposes, I have oversighted the edits where your password was revealed. I agree with Fram above that it would be best if you changed your password immediately. Risker (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And that means that Risker has hidden the password so that even administrators cannot see it. Stifle (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Pranav Soneji has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 14:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:27, 29 December 2009 (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).

Daffodils333 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Jesus once said, "let he has not vandalized cast the first block". We all know that the so called "respectable" users just have a sock puppet they vandalize with. Stop being a hypocite

Decline reason:

Calling admins names, random accusations of sockpuppetry and misuse of New Testament quotes shall not get thee anywhere (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:27, 26 January 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).

Daffodils333 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What, that quote was from the New Testament!!!!!????? I thought it was part of the Qu'ran. Anyway back on topic. Has anyone noticed User:Ruhrfisch writing style is suspiciously similar to User: yourlover123

Decline reason:

And back to your block for falling afoul of WP:NOTTHEM. Your next unblock better be serious, because it's the last chance you'll get. — Daniel Case (talk) 19:45, 26 January 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).

Daffodils333 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to apologize most profusely for my recent edits. I acted totally out of character and was on a bit of an attention seeking spree (it won't happen again). At calming down I have come to the conclusion that are fair proportion of my edits were inappropriate. Although I realize that I can't escape unpunished, perhaps you could block me for a certain amount of time, instead of indefinitely. Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Decline reason:

I have just reviewed every single edit you have ever made, and this unblock request was the one and only edit that was not entirely inappropriate, so your contention that this was just a minor incident and out of character does not hold water. Please indicate specifically what you would do if unblocked. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:46, 26 January 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).

Daffodils333 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I plan to make constructive edits to a variety of different articles. Basically I'm going to add appropriate information when I come across it.

Decline reason:

You flatly do not have me convinced given that it took a threat of talk page revocation before you started straightening up. Declined. Mutes —Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Boribori!)} 21:43, 26 January 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.