Trustwiki

AVault/Cyberathlete

Hello. First of all, if are you editing as 99.7.238.58? If so, please ensure you're signed into this account - it makes it easier for discussions and such. Anyway, as regards my edits to AVault and Cyberathlete, I'm not necessarily removing information because I think it's incorrect - it may be unnecessary (as the "legal status" section was on cyberathlete), it may clutter the article (having an ext link and a ref pointing to the same place) or it may simply not contain any useful content (which is why I changed cyberathlete to a redirect). Simply based on your edit history, I suggest you read WP:COI and WP:OWN. Thanks! Fin©™ 15:19, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Hiya. I didn't say you had a conflict of interest, I simply pointed you to the article. It's not a good idea to make threats and you should probably withdraw them - please remain civil and assume good faith. You also don't seem to have a firm grasp on the idea behind Wikipedia - anyone can edit for any reason. If you truly feel my edits have be seriously detrimental (as I see it, they were removing excessive external links, adding a reference, requesting a reference, removing pov and unverifiable information etc), feel free to discuss them (individually, the exact content removed, if possible) on the related article talk page, or gimme a shout on my own talk. Thanks! Fin©™ 15:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello again. Saying you're going to email me, Jack Tretton and Wikipedia is a threat, regardless of how you paint it (and I've brought it up on the administrator's noticeboard). I urge you to read various wikipedia policies, including WP:POV ("pioneering" in this edit), WP:VERIFIABILITY ("widely regarded" in the same edit, "one of the oldest" in this edit). Yet again, please discuss my edits individually if you've got a problem with them. Thanks! Fin©

Indefinitely blocked

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia as long as the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. –MuZemike 16:27, 22 March 2010 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have been editing a few articles on Wikipedia for 4 years without problems until today when Falcon9x5 decided that he was going to randomly delete crucial information from the articles and kept deleting my updates. All I did was tell him that he would receive an email (the address which is available at his blog) from CPL asking him why he kept deleting the articles and that we would contact Wikipedia. No legal threats were ever directed his way. I would like this action reviewed.

Decline reason:

In reviewing this request I asked myself:

• Who is "we", bearing in mind Wikipedia's policy of "one editor, one account"?
• Why would you email three different destinations over a trivial content dispute unless "we" have some undeclared interest in seeing the content in your preferred version?
• Perhaps most seriously, why would you contact someone you believe to be Falcon9x5's employer unless you are intending to make an implied threat?

Although you may not have made a specific legal threat, you've engaged in rather unpleasant behaviour intended to drive another editor away from the article. Unblock declined. EyeSerene^talk 18:01, 22 March 2010 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Interesting that "unpleasant behaviour" gets you banned from Wikipedia permanently. Regardless please advise on how to delete my account as I no longer want to contribute to a system that rewards someone intent in destroying what others worked in maintaining for years.

Decline reason:

Accounts cannot be deleted. Stephen 12:42, 23 March 2010 (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.

Proposed deletion of Adrenaline Vault

The article Adrenaline Vault has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Zero secondary sources with which to establish notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 22:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Avault logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Avault logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 02:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)