User talk:JustinYanNumber1

The owner of this account is suspected of abusively using multiple accounts.

(Account information: block log · CentralAuth · suspected sockpuppets · confirmed sockpuppets)

November 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to Jasper High School (Plano, Texas). Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. If you want to see your name on the internet, get a facebook page. Even if all the unreferenced stuff you added about yourself were true, it still wouldn't make you notable enough for mention on Wikipedia. Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Jasper High School (Plano, Texas). While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Please do not continue to self-promote. Second warning.

um, I'm not even Justin Yan, so I am am not talking about myself nor am I mentioning myself on Wikipedia.

January 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Phantom time hypothesis, you may be blocked from editing. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:44, 28 January 2013 (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. Dougweller (talk) 21:41, 28 January 2013 (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).

JustinYanNumber1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I believe I should be unblocked simply because I deserve a second chance. I admit that my previous edits were foolish and vandalizing, and I should not have made them. However, I have learned from my past mistakes, and know not to repeat this again. JustinYanNumber1 (talk) 05:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given the repeated abuse from this and your other account, I do not believe you are here to contribute constructively. --Kinu ^t/_c 07:14, 1 February 2013 (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).

JustinYanNumber1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Like I said in my previous appeal, I understand that my previous actions were detrimental to the community, and that they are acts of vandalism. I will restrain myself from committing these actions again. When the Andy Dingley person told me to stop my disruptive editing (and if I continued, I would be blocked from editing), I did not continue to edit any more pages (although part of this reason is because I was blocked quickly after Andy Dingley posted that, so I didn't have much time to go vandalize). Like the previous administrator Kinu said, I was not here to contribute constructively, but that was the past, and I have realized that what I did was wrong. I hope you realize that I do deserve a second chance, and that I will not continue to disruptively edit. JustinYanNumber1 (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you have admitted to sockpuppetry below, we now have to handle this request differently. See below. — Daniel Case (talk) 02:33, 2 February 2013 (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.

What is your relation to King Kurry II (talk · contribs)? —DoRD (talk) 23:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is me!

OK. Do you have any other accounts we should know about? Now's the time ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am pretty sure I have another account (pretty sure at least 2 actually), but I do not remember the usernames, as I last used one of them about a year ago, and the other one like 5 years ago (should be the same IP as this one). I created this account since I didn't remember those usernames or passwords.

Hello? It would be great if you guys could respond