Misplaced Pages

User talk:Renewal6: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:18, 20 September 2021 editPhilKnight (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators125,401 edits →September 2021: decline← Previous edit Revision as of 20:10, 20 September 2021 edit undoDronebogus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users21,227 edits →Surviving Veterans of World War IINext edit →
Line 57: Line 57:


==Surviving Veterans of World War II== ==Surviving Veterans of World War II==
Don't you just love working on an article (for my case, for over a decade, only to have some ] say 'it pleaseth me not, delete'? ] (]) 15:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC) Don't you just love working on an article (for my case, for over a decade, only to have some {{RPA}} say 'it pleaseth me not, delete'? ] (]) 15:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)


== There is a discussion that concerns you going on == == There is a discussion that concerns you going on ==

Revision as of 20:10, 20 September 2021

Welcome

Hello, Renewal6, and Welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 21:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Getting started Finding your way around Editing articles Getting help How you can help

Your closure of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of notable surviving veterans of World War II (2nd nomination)

It is considered inappropriate to close a deletion discussion you have participated in, see WP:NACD. I suggest you undo it and wait for someone else to close the discussion. TompaDompa (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Surviving Veterans of World War II

Don't you just love working on an article (for my case, for over a decade, only to have some (Personal attack removed) say 'it pleaseth me not, delete'? Bkatcher (talk) 15:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

There is a discussion that concerns you going on

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Renewal6_and_Bkatcher_being_disruptive_and_uncivil Dronebogus (talk) 17:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Renewal6 and Bkatcher being disruptive and uncivil. Thank you. Isabelle 17:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. 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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 18:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
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).

Renewal6 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been blocked for disputing the rightfulness of an AfD discussion closure. If I chose the wrong means to do that, the accusation of having created a vandalism-only-account, i. e. the reason for getting blocked, would still be unfounded. Due to the fact that I created this account primarily in an attempt to prevent what I perceived as vandalism from other users, I feel obliged to contest this categorization being diametrically opposite to my self-conception. Renewal6 (talk) 13:00, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You repeatedly reverted a valid close of a deletion discussion - that is clearly disruptive. You do not offer any assurances that you will not engage in similar conduct in future. In this context, I am declining your request. PhilKnight (talk) 14:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

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.

.