User talk:Breznev08

Welcome!

Hello, Breznev08, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Paston College has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 22:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Paston College, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 17:14, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Paston College, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:47, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock your reason here ...I have not been using my account for vandalism what you have stated is a pack of lies. Have you really analysed all the edits I have done on Wikipedia? I should be unbanned because I have not committed any vandalism and have been banned despite the fact that I have included relevant references. In fact what you are doing is practicing a form of censorship as well as suppressing free speech.

I would like to appeal again against the fact I'm currently banned.

You haven't formatted an unblock appeal properly. You have repeatedly engaged in vandalism. The "relevant references" you posted were not relevant at all. You made a serious—libellous even—claim about an institution and did not back it up with any reliable sources, just links to articles discussing the general problem. I'm not going to unblock you because you don't seem to understand why your edits are against policy.

If an administrator were to unblock you, what sort of edits would you intend to make on Wikipedia? —Tom Morris (talk) 08:59, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well excuse me I appealed against my block in the way that you indicated in the generic message you sent informing me that I was blocked from editing. What else do I have do in the appeal process,especially considering I received an e-mail informing me that my appeal had been rejected? I admit that the links perhaps were to general but more fool elements of the media for not reporting the bullying occurring at this institution.

I can ask another administrator to look at this, but your only purpose here seems to be inserting unsourced negative material to an article—vandalism, in other words. You haven't answered the question: if you were to be unblocked, what sort of edits would you seek to make on Wikipedia? Because if you want to carry on making the same kind of edits you were blocked for making, no administrator will unblock you. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:31, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Breznev08 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would be interested in editing articles related to Politics, History, Geography and possibly Education. I accept you have made your point that material needs to be sourced and would be most grateful if you could unblock me.

Could I please be unblocked?

Accept reason:

I have unblocked you. Consider this your last and only chance. If you can edit in a reasonable fashion and follow Wikipedia's policies, you are welcome to edit. If you continue to insert poorly-sourced libellous and disruptive material, you will find yourself blocked again very quickly. —Tom Morris (talk) 05:45, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]