User talk:Nerull 777

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).

Nerull 777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It's been six years since I've been blocked. I honestly forgot what I was even blocked for. Nerull 777 (talk) 07:21, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were blocked for vandalism, like this Thank you, MaxSem. And this edit, from merely 2 years ago, seems to indicate that even then you were a vandal. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:35, 12 August 2012 (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.

You're blocked for stuff like this. What are you intending to do if unblocked? Max Semenik (talk) 07:39, 12 August 2012 (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).

Nerull 777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I got blocked for vandalism six years ago and the blocking admin quit using Wikipedia shortly after. I'd like to be unblocked, so if I ever wanted to contribute, I would be able to do so.

Decline reason:

It really doesn't matter that the blocking admin quit using Wikipedia; your block was, and is, entirely appropriate, and given your contributions, any admin would have done exactly the same. Now, what are you intending to do if unblocked? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To tell you the truth, I'm not planning on doing anything if unblocked. If I were to be unblocked, I would not vandalize like I did six years ago. I would probably just be glad that I'm unblocked and not log on. If I were still a vandal, would I really be trying to get my old account unblocked or would I have made a new account? The latter would be the route that a vandal would take and I'm not a vandal anymore. Nerull 777 (talk) 17:48, 17 August 2012 (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).

Nerull 777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

To tell you the truth, I'm not planning on doing anything if unblocked. If I were to be unblocked, I would not vandalize like I did six years ago. I would probably just be glad that I'm unblocked and either not log on or rarely edit if I did have constructive edits to make. If I were still a vandal, would I really be trying to get my old account unblocked or would I have made a new account? The latter would be the route that a vandal would take and I'm not a vandal anymore.

Decline reason:

Per below. If you do not intend to edit, there is no need to unblock you or even for you to request unblocking. If you do intend to edit, then based on your past history we will need to know what edits you intend to make. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:20, 18 August 2012 (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.

You'd be surprised at what vandals will do. And if you don't think you're going to be logging on at all why do you want to be unblocked at all? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:47, 18 August 2012 (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).

Nerull 777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I've been blocked from editing for six years. If I intended to vandalize, then I would have made another account a long time ago. No, I don't have any set plans of editing when I'm unblocked. Why should I have set plans on editing something to get unblocked? That's quite illogical. I'd rather have my account unblocked so I could constructively edit pages,within the scope of my studies,when it's an appropriate edit.I know you guys love your borderline-trolling/excessive red tape admin behavior, but answer me one question. Do you think anyone would try to get an account unblocked after six years? Anyone would just make another account, but not me. I'm not going to break the rules and that should be obvious if I won't make a puppet account.

Decline reason:

The purpose of an account at Wikipedia is to make edits to the encyclopedia to improve it in some way. If you do not intend to make edits, you do not need an account - it really is as simple as that. The more you keep repeating the same request (especially adding things like "I know you guys love your borderline-trolling/excessive red tape admin behavior", the less likely you are to be unblocked. Should you decide at some future point that you wish to actually start editing the encyclopedia and have some idea what you want to do, come back then and request unblock. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:56, 12 September 2012 (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.

Proposed deletion of Nerull

The article Nerull has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 18:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]