User talk:Donthaveacowman76

Donthaveacowman76, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Donthaveacowman76! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:09, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AdvisorShares links.

Hello, I'm Nagle. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. --John Nagle (talk) 06:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Donthaveacowman76. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! 220 of ^Borg 00:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 19:01, 16 June 2014 (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).

Donthaveacowman76 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not the same user as all those other accounts on the list. I tried to keep the useful publicly available information posted by previous users from being white-washed away and replaced by marketing content. I guess we got carried away in an edit war, but most of the information that was posted was well sourced and someone with a username of "AdvisorShares" tried to erase inconvenient facts before they were blocked. I assumed that subsequent accounts were the same person. Maybe the wording could be less biased but the information came from reliable sources and was mainly facts and quotes. Most of it should stay and someone can add other more positive information if it is well sourced. Donthaveacowman76 (talk) 23:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I defer to the results of the Checkuser investigation; someone else with access to that tool will have to review the results. — Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 17 June 2014 (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.