User talk:DrakeFan373

March 2018

Hello, I'm Etineskid. I noticed that you recently removed content from Washing machine without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Etineskid (talk) 04:10, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Autistic Pride Day, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. SummerPhD^v2.0 16:14, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have also reverted an edit where you did this to other people's comments on a talk page. Please never change other people's comments, and please also read MOS:RETAIN. Thank you. -- BobTheIP editing as 92.29.29.149 (talk) 01:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning. The next time you change English usage from one variety to another without even a cursory attempt to guage or gain WP:CONSENSUS you will be blocked. -- BobTheIP editing as 92.29.29.149 (talk) 01:56, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're not an administrator. You do not have the power to warn or block people from contributing. DrakeFan373 (talk) 02:00, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've also had to revert your edit to Chocolate with Nuts which removed maintenance tags without explanation. Again, I implore you to consider editing constructively or a block is extremely likely. 92.29.29.149 (talk) 02:56, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- Any editor can warn you, even those without accounts. Any Admin can block you, and an editor can take you to WP:ANI or WP:AIV, and if you continue to get warnings that will certainly happen. Doug Weller talk 12:10, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes

These often have unused or unneeded parameters, there is no reason to delete them. They aren't constructed individually for each article. Doug Weller talk 12:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking

Please read WP:OVERLINK and follow that guideline. There's no need in any article to link words such as "eggs". Doug Weller talk 12:18, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. bonadea contributions talk 22:14, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:45, 4 April 2018 (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).

DrakeFan373 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry. It's just that I thought vandalism would be funny just to do as a joke every now and then but I got carried away. I also thought unsourced content wasnt allowed but I guess I was wrong. Please give me another chance.

Decline reason:

I see a number of problems here on this talk page, including the explicit rejection of helpful warnings. I am also disturbed that you would even think that "vandalism would be funny just to do as a joke every now and then". I'd need to see all of the problems addressed, together with a convincing explanation of why it would be to the advantage of the encyclopedia to unblock you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:55, 5 April 2018 (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.

Your recent vandalism is far from the only issue identified on this page. Your unblock request is more likely to succeed if you also address your these items as well. -- BobTheIP editing as 2.28.13.202 (talk) 01:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DrakeFan373: Explain this then. It's obvious that you are a sockpuppet of User:KingOfBacon, or whoever is behind that account. Your sockpuppetry is already enough to have this account indef blocked. LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ive bern vandalizing the mcgriddles page longer than you think.

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).

DrakeFan373 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Just look at the 2015 log on McGriddles; that disruptive edit on June 8, 2018. Can't believe we didn't celebrate this anniversary. DrakeFan373 (talk) 04:47, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Talk page access revoked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:37, 3 July 2018 (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.