DuckBeaks

Please stop reverting my edits

This page was restored by Noru111344, in this revision: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1112964592

Hello, I have seen your edits on Hurricane Fiona I reverted the edit because of the infobox already has the info. The infobox small has the current information the infobox hurricane has the peak image, and damages for when it dissipates, if you could please stop reverting my edits, it's disruptive to me. PopularGames (talk) 02:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

first, i only reverted once, stop acting like it was persistant. second, what infobox? the one that has the live imaging on the current status of the hurricane as we speak? how do you expect me to simplify time wasted by others since there is no code that immediately plasters the hurricane at peak intensity when it dissipates. how is wikipedia supposed to do such action? that makes me very upset and annoyed about you and your "absurd" way of "cleaning and improving" the page. best i could do is to make it a note, if not, that's your problem. do or die, its your choice.DuckBeaks (talk) 02:43, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

User suspected of vandalism

I know I'm not an admin, but I wanna say

Hello, I'm Noru111344. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Noru111344 (talk) 03:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

October 2022

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Hey, please don't spam, nor troll in edit summaries. Thank you. Sarrail (talk) 03:15, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

They are also kind of harrassing them in the edit summary. Noru111344 (talk) 03:33, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

They even said deleting because that ignorant arthropod did not respond to me since his IQ is lower than his "contributions" and is a useless parasite with no life. Noru111344 (talk) 03:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sarrail (talk) 03:23, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Do not use misleading, trollish, or vandalistic edit summaries. If you continue to do so, I will block you. PhilKnight (talk) 03:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

I will just mention that that includes completely meaningless edit summaries. JBW (talk) 09:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I promise to not do it again.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have learned why I was blocked and I request this unblock to right my wrong. It started when I made edits with frivolous summaries because I thought I was allowed to do it. Then after a user removed an image from a hurricane article and I undone it, he responded in a way I didn't appreciate. I told him my version which included something that would be one of the reasons I was blocked, but he gave me the cold shoulder. When I removed the post, I made an angry message at him since he didn't respond, then I continued where I left off. It remained like that until a user reported me to the administrators because he thought what I said to another user was a death threat and the edit summaries I made, some of which was completely nonsense. I watched them discuss back and forth until a bot archived it due to inactivity. When that happened, I announced my resignation and left the account until the dude who reported me responded with an okay. I later told him that I was going to make a new account and told him I wasn't going to be defeated by him. Even though I meant it as starting a new frontier, they thought I was going to do the same thing on another account, so they blocked me and disabled account creation. Then the user (not the person who blocked me) responded with a sarcastic message, so I deleted the article and snapped back at him because of his message. Now, I learned the destruction I caused on this account because of an unaware rule I didn't know exist. I wish to redeem myself for what I have done and promise to avoid this repeating. I don't expect to be forgiven, I'm only saying this to prove what I did wrong. Thank you for reading.DuckBeaks (talk) 15:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

 Confirmed sockpuppetry. Yamla (talk) 16:14, 8 November 2022 (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.

You are not permitted to remove (or edit) declined unblock requests for your currently active block. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 23:16, 8 November 2022 (UTC)