User talk:KingDennisG

August 2016

Hello, I'm Marvellous Spider-Man. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Sambuca (song) have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Marvellous Spider-Man (talk) 16:40, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Sambuca (song), you may be blocked from editing. Marvellous Spider-Man (talk) 17:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 18:05, 7 August 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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not sure why i have been blocked i have edited correct and relevent information in good faith is this discrimination? why are you being so abrupt and rude?KingDennisG (talk) 21:31, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your edits are clearly promotional, hence the block. Sorry, if we come across as abrupt and rude, but we are just volunteers doing our jobs. PhilKnight (talk) 01:39, 8 August 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 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).

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

Request reason:

To suggest my contribution was for promotional purposes is bogus and unfair. i noticed incorrect information and only made addition for research and refference purpose. I feel there is not enough information, to prevent a reliable source adding vaild and relavant information defeats the object of Wikipedia. KingDennisG (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There's no reason to unblock you if you're only here to add links that clearly don't meet WP:EL guidelines. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:54, 8 August 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 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).

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

Request reason:

It appears there could be a communication breakdown, i have no problem with following rules,to be diplomatic would you be so kind to share the guidelines with me? KingDennisG (talk) 5:26 pm, Yesterday (UTC+2)

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. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:08, 9 August 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.

The WP:EL link above is blue (as it is here too), which means you can click it to read the guidelines. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=Thanks for the link Zebedee, I have read the terms and it appears i am not in breach of the guidelines. and appear to be a victim of the personal prejudice of Wikipedia members,Which is extremely unsettling i am being unjustly persecuted.please take the time to review the guidelines.

" Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia (external links), but they should not normally be placed in the body of an article. All external links must conform to certain formatting restrictions.

Some acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy. "

 149.254.58.88 (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2016 (UTC)}}[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) I checked the link and I can't find any extra information about the song. If I am mistaken please provide a link to the specific page that has that information. Remember that the song is the subject of the article, not Dennis G (you?). Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 17:34, 9 August 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).

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

Request reason:

Hi,I am fully aware the article is regarding a song and not an artist.This is why i only edited the incorrect writer name spelling, and added the writer/artist website link for further reference,as permitted by Wikipedia. As i feel there is a lack of information and Wikipedia is suppose to be a reliable source of information 149.254.182.2 (talk) 22:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You need to be logged in to request an unblock for this account. MER-C 08:42, 10 August 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 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).

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

Request reason:

I request to be unblocked KingDennisG (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The link you were trying to add was clearly inappropriate. If you insist on not listening to what you are being told, then I see no need for you to have access to this talk page and I have revoked it. You can use WP:UTRS if you wish to make a further appeal, but you will have no more success that way if you continue to refuse to listen. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:10, 11 August 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.

Recommending that the next reviewing admin remove talk page access per WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:36, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

you don't seem to have read the whole page at WP:EL. Given your account name and the link you're seeking to add, this section is of obvious relevance. Blackmane (talk) 07:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]