User talk:JoshyyP

June 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Peanut, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Peanut was changed by JoshyyP (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.907375 on 2012-06-14T18:02:21+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other contributors, as you did with this edit to User talk:Mike Rosoft. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. -Ryan 19:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What was this for - the deletion of your article Philip Kakoulli?

The point is that Wikipedia is not a hosting service; not everything gets to have an article. There are notability (inclusion) guidelines - articles that fail to establish the subject's notability may be nominated for deletion, and articles that don't even begin to assert its notability or significance may be deleted upon discovery by any administrator. (Plus, the first version of the article was obviously not serious.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:29, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What a persuasive argument - there seems to be nothing to add. Seriously: I have already explained why I had deleted the article (and the relevant policies and guidelines); if you disagree with my decision, feel free to challenge it at deletion review. And personal attacks won't make your position any stronger; they just may get you blocked from editing. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Electric charge ‎, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nczempin (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have just reported you at administrators' noticeboard as a disruption-only account. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 13:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Alexf^(talk) 13:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]