User talk:Slim Bun

December 2019

Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Mrs. Doubtfire have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 17:37, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No u are not contribution Slim Bun (talk) 17:39, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Mrs. Doubtfire. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Mrs. Doubtfire was changed by Slim Bun (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.954382 on 2019-12-25T18:11:08+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:11, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Gary Merrington, you may be blocked from editing. Serols (talk) 18:13, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oki blobi me Slim Bun (talk) 18:15, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 🎄BethNaught🎄 (talk) 18:21, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block apeal

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).

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

Request reason:

I think the block is unfair, and was just admin abuse. I didn't do anything and will not do anything. Thank you Slim Bun (talk) 19:05, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Obvious trolling and vandalism – plus more logged-out vandalism, too. Given that you see nothing wrong with vandalizing our website, I've declined your unblock request and revoked your talk page access. If you have something non-trollish to say, you can use WP:UTRS. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:19, 25 December 2019 (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.

UTRS appeal #56508

is open. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #56508

is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]