User talk:Zacca14

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to OTF, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. | Uncle Milty | talk | 13:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Edward Harris (British diplomat). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Philip Trueman (talk) 15:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ghansawangi, you may be blocked from editing. Philip Trueman (talk) 15:16, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Helophilus affinis, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Philip Trueman (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of ETAF

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on ETAF requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. andy (talk) 15:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:28, 28 November 2010 (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).

Zacca14 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

all edits except ETAF was done because i forgot to logoff and it was someone else and ETAF is not vandalism Zacca14 (talk) 10:35 am, Today (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

It sounds to me like you just admitted your account was compromised by someone else, which means that we cannot unblock it. TN X Man 15:47, 28 November 2010 (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).

Zacca14 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

they don't know my password i just forgot to logoff Zacca14 (talk) 16:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information.
There is not a single good edit from this account, several vandalism edits, and one blatant SPAM article - which followed the vandalism, looks like gaming the system for auto-confirmed to me. I see no reason to unblock. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 16:43, 28 November 2010 (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.

But how do we know that you've regained control of your account and this isn't some other person still playing games? TN X Man 16:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i will not continue to vandalise wikipedia and i will make some useful contributions

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).

Zacca14 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand that i was blocked for vandalism a Zacca14 (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have stated that the vandal was not you. This account is therefore cpmpromised and cannot be unblocked. I cannot now tell to whom I am talking. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:43, 28 November 2010 (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.