User talk:Axumbasra

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Axumbasra, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Axumbasra! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Samwalton9 (talk).

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2018[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Bahudhara. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Eltham College (Victoria) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Bahudhara (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Subcomandante Moisés (June 15)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TYelliot was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
TYelliot | Talk | Contribs 11:51, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018[edit]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Vangelis Tzolos, you may be blocked from editing. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 01:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018[edit]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:Sameer Dave. \\\Septrillion:- ~~‭~~10Eleventeen 06:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning. Stop your disruptive editing please. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:35, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon
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 ~~~~}}.  Fut.Perf. 11:37, 11 July 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).

Axumbasra (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Non-apology Just a little concerned about this one. Of course a transparently insincere "non-apology" can be in itself quite rude, and certainly no substitute for a "real" apology - on the other hand expressing guilt or remorse when one remains quite sure that the offence the other person took was hyper-sensitive or even contrived can also be blatantly insincere, and in fact look more like sarcastic gloating than real regret. BUT what about "Although I did not mean to imply ... I realise that my remarks could have been taken that way, and I am sincerely sorry for the (unintended) offence they caused". Or even "I'm very sorry my remarks caused offence". An apology of this kind borders on the "non-apology" (in fact there is a grey area where it could be taken either way). On the other hand it can be seen as driven as much by aversion to hypocrisy as a disinclination to admit fault - I think in most circumstances a reasonable person would give such a "non-apology" the benefit of any doubt over its "good faith". Subject to comment - I think I will rewrite the section concerned to be a little more flexible.

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. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:15, 12 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.

Your draft article, Draft:Subcomandante Moisés[edit]

Hello, Axumbasra. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Subcomandante Moisés".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 19:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]