User talk:10Blaugrana10

July 2021

Hello, I'm FMSky. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 02:49, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you may be blocked from editing. FMSky (talk) 21:54, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 7 days for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. PhilKnight (talk) 22:40, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (The Best FIFA Football Awards) for edit warring.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've been trying to add that same stuff for months now. You know that other editors don't agree with your change, but you keep doing it, so I've blocked your account from editing that page. Please learn to use talk pages, and discuss changes with other editors. If you start disrupting other articles in the same way, you'll likely be blocked site-wide. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 17:12, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problem sources

Please don't use the "opera" series of blogs as sources, as you did here; these are clearly labeled as self published. Kuru (talk) 22:55, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've already been asked once to stop using to stop using self published sources. I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you didn't know that transfermarkt is user-edited, but that reddit is not a suitable source should be readily apparent. Please stop citing sources like this. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Johan Cruyff, you may be blocked from editing. You've been warned several times now to stop citing self-published source. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Logging out

Editing while logged to evade scrutiny is considered sockpuppetry. If you do that again, or continue to add improperly cited material, your next block will likely be indefinite. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are a bastard and a son of a whore. You think Transfermarket (most famous football website) is an unreliable source😂😂😂 10Blaugrana10 (talk) 16:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

firefly ( t · c ) 16:14, 30 January 2023 (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).

10Blaugrana10 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I once edited a page too many times because I didn't see the warnings. I accept my mistake and will not do it again. Please unblock my account. Thank you.

Decline reason:

Not a chance after this. Talk page access revoked. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 06:12, 6 February 2023 (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.

10Blaugrana10 (talk) 01:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #69160

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:24, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.