User talk:Richboyliang

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Vundo, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 04:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

The recent edit you made to Vundo constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Maxis ftw (talk) 03:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Vundo, you will be blocked from editing. - -' The Spook (TALK) _{(Share the Love with Barnstars)} 01:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hey, thanks for your message. Thanks for telling me about the situation. I understand your frustration about an another editor who may remove what you wrote without explaining his or her edits on the article's talk page. If someone keeps deleting what you wrote, you can start a discussion on the talk page of the other user, or if it seems that they want to edit war go ahead and find some arbitration with an administrator [[1]]. Hope that helps. Maxis ftw (talk) 08:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Michael Jackson. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. — Σxplicit 00:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I have reverted your self-nomination because it didn't comply with the procedure shown at WP:RFB. However, before you follow that procedure, can I strongly suggest that you review the criteria both for RFA and RFB on that page and determine if you think the community will be able to review you based on only 28 edits in your history.  7  05:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked you indefinitely for this edit, as well the vandalism that you have been warned for before. To appeal your block, please add {{unblock|Your reason here}} to your user talk page. NW (Talk) 15:48, 12 September 2009 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I know i got warnings but you can't just start off blocking me with a block for eternity. Besides, I won't do it again.

Decline reason:

I might believe you if there weren't a long history of abuse from your account. Impersonating another user is deserving of a block; the history makes it indefinite or at least long-term. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:36, 26 February 2010 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Well then please at least reduce the length of this block, I've been unable to edit for quite some time now.

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock 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
  • understand what you have been blocked for,
  • will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  • will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:53, 27 February 2010 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Review the 1st 2 unblock requests and please reduce the length of this block.

Decline reason:

Review the last two responses to your unblock requests and make a new request accordingly. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 01:35, 2 March 2010 (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.