User talk:Pitcroft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Your request to delete this talk page[edit]

I have declined your request because user talk pages are not normally deleted, see WP:DELTALK. With a few exceptions, none of which apply here, you may blank anything you like from your user talk page, including this message, but the history is retained for the record. If you want more than that, and you are leaving Wikipedia permanently, see Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing for what you can do. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015[edit]

Stop icon
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 below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Sarah-Jane (talk) 10:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015[edit]

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Pitcroft (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribs deleted contribscreation log change block settingsunblockfilter log)

Request reason:

This is petty spite dressed up editing. Why are my reverts and edits less valid than anyone else's? I have explained my reasons countless times to the other 'editors' on why their article is grossly inaccurate and very badly written! SPECTRE is an acronym and nothing has proven that otherwise, except for a minor quote from the Economist (though they are not the creators of the Fleming novels or the Bond films). The spelling and grammar is appalling in some places, and if the so called 'editors' had been more polite to start with I would have not been so vehement in my defence. Perhaps though should have known better than to try to state my reasons with a bunch of self important nerdy fanboys/fangirls.

Decline reason:

Removing the ANI thread shows more disruption than people are interested in dealing with here. The insults stop now though or else this talk page will blocked too. Ricky81682 (talk) 11:25, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

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.

Stop hand
Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

I have removed access based on your continual removal of the declined unblock request per WP:BLANKINGSarah-Jane (talk) 23:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)