Jump to content

User talk:Society of Christians Dronfield

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


March 2022[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to St John the Baptist's Church, Dronfield have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You what CRETIN, think you can get in my way do you ! 

Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 16:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I called a bot a cretin it is not a sentient being Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 18:15, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dronfield edit[edit]

Hello. I have undone your edit to the above article; generally, lists of notable residents in community articles are limited to those with their own Wikipedia articles; as your addition did not, I have removed it. I also note that your source was, in fact, copied from the next entry on the list. Please do note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and additions should be properly sourced when introduced - with sources that apply to the subject at hand. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was a mere mistake my wee lad, I would appreciate it if you did the decent thing and put it back up on the double ! Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 16:59, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well, if you can provide me with some indication that there is, in fact, a Saint Hale to whom this refers to, I'd be happy to. Sources please. Tony Fox (arf!) 17:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ayup one second lad 

Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Halvard Bjornson is the name search him thank you, here in NE Derbyshire he is known as Hale, as a result of Scandinavian presence in this area ie the Dane law. Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 17:29, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022[edit]

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

  • Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
  • Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
  • Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page.
You have also engaged in personal attacks and added unreferenced content that may be false. Cullen328 (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really quite vile this CITE now the personal attacks Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) Cretin is an absolutely outrageous way of addressing fellow editors. SN54129 17:50, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I called a bot a cretin a bot! It is not sentient Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 18:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, our bots are alive. ALIVE. SN54129 18:31, 25 March 2022 (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).

Society of Christians Dronfield (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

your reason here being told that this is a promotional page, it’s nothing of the sort, I miss referenced one post and I’ve been hounded, I called the bot a cretin, is that really that bad as it is not a fellow editor as this suggests it has human feelings it does not. I have since provided mr Fox with the referencing. I am simply called Christian society of Dronfield their is no such society in Dronfield, therefore this is promoting nothing !

Decline reason:

You are correct in one thing: Your name really not should have been why you were blocked. However, as noted above by Cullen328, you are correctly blocked. None of your edits before you were blocked shows me any seriousness about contributing. Accordingly I am changing the reason for your block to NOTHERE. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 26 March 2022 (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.

Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whats alive about a automated edit made by something called a bot ? Society of Christians Dronfield (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case, I disagree a bit because I think that the username is a crystal clear violation of the username policy that forbids Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, organization, group, club, institution, or product. I do not think that a defense based on "this group does not actually exist" has any validity, since the Wikipedia edits in question might plausibly be part of an attempt to create such a group. I chose this as the primary (but not only) reason for the block, because it seemed the most obvious reason for blocking at the time I made the decision. Cullen328 (talk) 05:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, fair enough; I do think NOTHERE is a far stronger and less disputable reason for the block that also sort of incorporates the username issue by reference. Daniel Case (talk) 05:26, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Society_of_Christians_Dronfield&oldid=1079381793"