Nip888

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Pinscreen has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Diannaa ^(Talk) 02:48, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Pinscreen constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Diannaa ^(Talk) 02:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Pinscreen. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Diannaa ^(Talk) 03:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Your blanking of the Pinscreen page is likely to get you blocked from editing. If you would care do explain yourself, please put a message on this page. Thanks. --Diannaa ^(Talk) 03:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Pinscreen, you will be blocked from editing without further notice.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Pinscreen was changed by Nip888 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.966395 on 2011-01-24T03:18:42+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Ward Fleming for deletion

The article Ward Fleming is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ward Fleming until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dougweller (talk) 07:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistent disruptive editing and attempts to use Wikipedia for promotion. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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).

Nip888 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have to cross reference ,I am editing to imrove the accuracy of the posts and keep it up to date. Nip888 (talk) 14:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:23, 24 January 2011 (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.

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).

Nip888 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Now I fully understand and studied the cause. thank you! Nip888 (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Nakon 20:51, 24 January 2011 (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.