User talk:Mornsoly

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).

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

Request reason:

I was a new participant in this community and don't 100 know the policy of Wikipedia, please apologize for this inconvenience and unlock my account. I do hope you understand please

Decline reason:

This account or IP address is not directly blocked. If you are still unable to edit, please copy the message that you see when you try to edit into a new unblock request. If your IP address is blocked and do not wish to reveal it publicly, you may make an appeal via the unblock ticket request service. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:47, 14 January 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was a new participant in this community and don't know the policy of Wikipedia, please apologize for this inconvenience and please unlock my account. I do hope you understand my request

Decline reason:

This account is not blocked. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 04:33, 16 January 2020 (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.

Speedy deletion nomination of Keo Sopherth

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Keo Sopherth, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Praxidicae (talk) 15:25, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Blog Supporter

Please do not introduce inappropriate pages, such as Draft:Blog Supporter, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Praxidicae (talk) 15:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Yunshui ^雲 _水 15:36, 16 January 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi My name is Morn Soly I am a high school teacher, I am writing to ask for review my account that is blocked, I know, my action does not meet your policy guideline because I am new but however, I love Wikipedia and I would like to share something that my students, people should know and I do believe it useful for them. Please consider as much appreciate

Decline reason:

You need to request unblock from your original account or otherwise explain why we think you have used more than one account when you haven't. If just just want to tell people you know something, that's not what Wikipedia is for, you should try social media. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 16 January 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, thank you for giving me time to read through the unlock request guideline, I really understand about my action and fall to a mistake and it does not comply with Wikipedia policies. I have two different accounts but the old one was gone because I don't use it anymore because it related to the person I supposed to write about. I much appreciate your understanding appeal request.

I'm sorry to put us through this again, but I'd like to discuss the removal of my block and respected the ban. I'd like to return because looking at my talk page, my profile, my effect on others... It just feels very wrong, like an open scar, I'm not the same person today. I don't want a new beginning, nor status, or friends. It's something I regret, and I really just want a last chance to give me a little bit of time, then I'll leave on my own. I sware I won't break a single rule, I won't be provocative in any way or be annoying. I'm requesting the creation of a thread to discuss about this. I ask you to not look at me as a manipulative, vile person... look at my terms, there is no way I can cause harm...And look at the time it has been... I am so very different, as you may be too... Please give me a chance to speak, before your judgment.

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. You'll need to request unblock from your original account (which you were editing from two days ago.) --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 15:22, 22 January 2020 (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.

Recent edit to Preap Sovath

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Preap Sovath, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 07:24, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]