User talk:MajorAwesome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi this is a test! Testing 1 2 3

Contents

[edit] Hat

See my response on Talk:Hat Jons63 (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Warning

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 21:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Cake face.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Cake face.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 20:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Cakesmash1.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Cakesmash1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 20:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this 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 request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I did nothing wrong and I agreed to have most of my changes removed after reasonible discussion"

Decline reason: "It is clear that your account is not going to be used to contribute constructively to the encyclopaedia, so your request for an unblock is declined. GBT/C 13:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this 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 request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I think if you are willing to take such action I should be given a better explanation than this. I have added nothing malicious, fallacious or offensive to wikipedia articles. I also do not see which of the criteria for blocking apply to me. Please give a reason other than just your personal opinion that you feel I will not "contribute constructively" (which is not grounds for blocking FYI). Regards, MA"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

I'm sorry - are you asking for your block to be reviewed again? If so, you need to use the {{unblock}} template, not copy the code from the {{unblock reviewed}} template. In any event, your contributions don't need to be malicious, fallacious or offensive to merit blocking, although given that you associate yourself with a hat shop in a place that doesn't exist, I could take issue with your assertion that you haven't added fallacious information to Wikipedia. Your contributions caused disruption through repeatedly inserting the same nonsense material despite the warnings not to. That disruption is the reason for your block - the feeling that you will not "contribute constructively" was not the reason for your block, but is the reason for your not being unblocked (and, FYI, I am au fait with the blocking policy. Of course, you're welcome to have yet another administrator review your block by using the {{unblock}} template, but if you do that, and your unblock is declined, too many times then your talk page will end up being protected to prevent you from editing it. GBT/C 16:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)