User talk:The Rejector

September 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is only being used 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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 22:51, 18 September 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was not given fair warning before being blocked. Wikipedia policy states that 4 warnings of increasing severity should be issued before a block is administered. I only recieved 1 warning, which was a Level 1 vandalism warning. The Rejector (talk) 22:55, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were vandalizing and you were blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 23:03, 18 September 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.

The policy states no such thing. ("Note that warnings are not a prerequisite for blocking"). Your entire editing is done in bad faith. I started to write up an explanation of the problems with your first edits, but when I saw your latest,[1] and [2] (note especially the deceptive edit summaries), I knew I was wasting my time. Also, whose sock are you, please? Bishonen | talk 23:06, 18 September 2017 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen:

What makes you think I'm a sock? The Rejector (talk) 23:25, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Several things. You're wrong that you must be warned four times before you're blocked, but the four warnings of increasing severity are actually a well-known trope to experienced users. Not so much to people who have been here for an hour and a half... and extreme newbies usually don't use Wikipedia clichés like "reliable source". But I'm not going to argue about it, because it doesn't matter: sock + vandal, or just vandal, it comes to the same thing: indefinite block. I was just curious. Tell me or not, just as you like; I'm done. Bishonen | talk 00:30, 19 September 2017 (UTC).[reply]