Jump to content

User talk:Michael21107: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
::Those conditions are what was meant when referring to topic bans. [[User:Lavalizard101|Lavalizard101]] ([[User talk:Lavalizard101|talk]]) 11:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
::Those conditions are what was meant when referring to topic bans. [[User:Lavalizard101|Lavalizard101]] ([[User talk:Lavalizard101|talk]]) 11:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
:::thanks [[User:Michael21107|Michael H]] ([[User talk:Michael21107#top|talk]]) 11:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
:::thanks [[User:Michael21107|Michael H]] ([[User talk:Michael21107#top|talk]]) 11:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=this was a massive lapse of judgement for which i apologize, but i dont believe tagging ONE redirect from redundant distingusher (or some tag like that which was added later) warrants an indefinite ban also considering the amount of helpful edits i made in this short time [[User:Michael21107|Michael H]] ([[User talk:Michael21107#top|talk]]) 00:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)}}

Revision as of 00:33, 9 August 2023

August 2023

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating the topic ban that was a condition of your unblock, with a completely inappropriate CSD-tagging at that, immediately after giving assurances at AN/I that you would stop rushing into things regarding deletion.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.   -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 02:43, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Michael21107, if you are unblocked, I will impose a restriction on any use of speedy deletion tags and a WP:1RR restriction for reverting content on a page. Do you agree to these conditions? from Z1720 posted on your talk page on the 31st July to which you responded i agree, thanks. Its right there in your talk page history. Lavalizard101 (talk) 10:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Im asking bout a topic ban— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael21107 (talkcontribs) 10:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Those conditions are what was meant when referring to topic bans. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks Michael H (talk) 11:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Michael21107 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

this was a massive lapse of judgement for which i apologize, but i dont believe tagging ONE redirect from redundant distingusher (or some tag like that which was added later) warrants an indefinite ban also considering the amount of helpful edits i made in this short time Michael H (talk) 00:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=this was a massive lapse of judgement for which i apologize, but i dont believe tagging ONE redirect from redundant distingusher (or some tag like that which was added later) warrants an indefinite ban also considering the amount of helpful edits i made in this short time [[User:Michael21107|Michael H]] ([[User talk:Michael21107#top|talk]]) 00:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=this was a massive lapse of judgement for which i apologize, but i dont believe tagging ONE redirect from redundant distingusher (or some tag like that which was added later) warrants an indefinite ban also considering the amount of helpful edits i made in this short time [[User:Michael21107|Michael H]] ([[User talk:Michael21107#top|talk]]) 00:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=this was a massive lapse of judgement for which i apologize, but i dont believe tagging ONE redirect from redundant distingusher (or some tag like that which was added later) warrants an indefinite ban also considering the amount of helpful edits i made in this short time [[User:Michael21107|Michael H]] ([[User talk:Michael21107#top|talk]]) 00:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}