User talk:Caradoc29105

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Khamis Gaddafi. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 14:14, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Khamis Gaddafi, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 13:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

Hello, I'm Fitzcarmalan. Your recent edit to the page 2014 Libyan conflict appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:45, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Khamis Gaddafi, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 01:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yo. Mic Check. Caradoc29105 (talk) 21:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Block notice

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. EternalFloette (talk) 12:43, 3 October 2014 (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).

Caradoc29105 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Caradoc29105 (talk) 21:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See below. Huon (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2016 (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.

Caradoc29105 (talk) 21:03, 19 March 2016 (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).

Caradoc29105 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't know how to keep a sandbox Caradoc29105 (talk) 21:04, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request 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

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Huon (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2016 (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 blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Caradoc29105 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16716 was submitted on Oct 15, 2016 08:59:51. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 08:59, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

repentant

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).

Caradoc29105 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand why I was blocked and will make constructive contributions by using {{help me}} Caradoc29105 (talk) 04:11, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

CU confirmed sockpuppetry less than a week ago makes this newfound repentance very hard to believe. Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:08, 28 April 2017 (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.