User talk:MessiahViking87

MessiahViking87, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi MessiahViking87! 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 experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:54, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

April 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm David.moreno72. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Omar Rodríguez-López discography— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. David.moreno72 (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm DatGuy. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Omar Rodríguez-López— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 16:36, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Laser brain (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2016 (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).

MessiahViking87 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I should be unblocked... because I was given no warning regarding blockage. And my edits were not entirely false. And have a sense of humor, people. And wikipedia mods have allllways tirelessly worked against my HIGHLY constructive edits.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 00:32, 1 June 2016 (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.

To the reviewing admin—please note that this user has received multiple warnings, despite their claim, and most of their edits consist of deliberate misinformation or downright vandalism. I see no reason why they should be allowed to continue editing. --Laser brain (talk) 22:41, 31 May 2016 (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).

MessiahViking87 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I truly had not received multiple warnings, nor was the edit in question false information, it simply lacked citation. My contributions are a far cry from misinformation and I have worked tirelessly over the years to provide accurate and up-to-date information where others have actually vandalized. Please review this block once again and proceed with the right action.

Decline reason:

I see two warnings at the very top of this page. And if you even in retrospect see nothing wrong with adding "Hopefully he gets his shit together now" to an encyclopedia article, you lack the competence to improve Wikipedia. Thus the right action is to not unblock you, sorry. Huon (talk) 22:08, 23 June 2016 (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.