Rfschunuiceffuhyddfchiuu
July 2014
edit
Hello, I'm Hammersoft. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to David Platt (Coronation Street) because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! --Hammersoft (talk) 19:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sophie Webster. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.
- If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place
{{Help me}}on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. - The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Sophie Webster was changed by Rfschunuiceffuhyddfchiuu (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.917624 on 2014-07-07T19:40:45+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Carla Connor, you may be blocked from editing. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:47, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Eva Price. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Your edits to my user page
editPlease use talk pages for communications. Your edits to my userpage [1] should be on my talk page. You may continue the conversation here. Your edits are not constructive because saying this like "a sexy" [2] is purely subjective and non-neutral. Please see WP:NPOV --Hammersoft (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
July 2014
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Rfschunuiceffuhyddfchiuu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am new to editing and thought my edits were constructive as I was adding more information. I have now seen the comments on my page and realise why they were wrong. I thought I was just adding more information to them by putting their nicknames in and adding extra adjectives.Rfschunuiceffuhyddfchiuu (talk) 19:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
If you thought the edits listed below were constructive, one must really question your competence to edit Wikipedia. --jpgordon::==( o ) 20:34, 7 July 2014 (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.
Really? Just adding nicknames?
- This isn't a nickname. It's an attack on the character.
- This is not a nickname either, just another attack.
- This is non-neutral and unsourced. It violates WP:NPOV.
- This too is non-neutral.
- This is an attack against the show, and purely your opinion.
Sorry. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)