User talk:Dexdunkers

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

Hi Dexdunkers! 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 I JethroBT (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Dexdunkers! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Who runs Wikipedia, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting content[edit]

Hello, I'm Canterbury Tail. I noticed that you recently removed content from Bregenz 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 your 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. Canterbury Tail talk 19:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally read up on WP:VANDALISM and WP:NOTVANDALISM to determine what is vandalism before making edits accusing of vandalism. Canterbury Tail talk 19:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I only made this Wikipedia account to vandalise articles Dexdunkers (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did I get banned and have all my edits deleted and how can this ban be lifted Dexdunkers (talk) 11:06, 6 September 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I think i was unfairly blocked because i made a sarcastic edit about Wikipedia vandalism and it was taken seriously and had edits be wrongly flagged for vandalism such as me adding locations of bus stops on the Bangor, county down Wikipedia page thank for reading this and I hope you consider unblocking me

Decline reason:

The problem is, you claimed you created this account solely for vandalism and a random sample of four article edits you made (out of 11) showed none of them were constructive. So, it seems like this wasn't a sarcastic claim after all. You are welcome to make a new unblock request, pointing to the constructive edits you've made. This will make it easier for the next reviewing admin to find them. Yamla (talk) 20:10, 6 September 2020 (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.

Fair enough Dexdunkers (talk) 05:32, 7 September 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I believe that the first appeal was wrong because they proved my point of taking sarcasm/jokes seriously and using it in a campaign against my quest to get Linfield supporters of the internet if you want to earn my respect back you should go through all of my edits and explain we they should get me banned thank you for reading,I hope you have a nice day and unblock my account

Decline reason:

Yamla told you to point to your productive edits; you haven't. It's not up to us to "earn [your] respect"; it's up to you to show why we should unblock this account. Please be mindful of how you present your next unblock requestion because a similar request to these last two will result in your talk page access being revoked. only (talk) 21:32, 7 September 2020 (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.

Dexdunkers (talk) 19:43, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you think this is my final edit well i will prove to yous that this is not just look at my edits to the Bangor and Campbell College page and if you reject this appeal I will not hesitate to create false accounts and start a vandalism campaign the likes you’ve never seen before Thank you for reading and you now have to give my account back to it’ Rightful owner Dexdunkers (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

So you think this is my final edit well i will prove to yous that this is not just look at my edits to the Bangor and Campbell College page and if you reject this appeal I will not hesitate to create false accounts and start a vandalism campaign the likes you’ve never seen before Thank you for reading and you now have to give my account back to it’ Rightful owner

Decline reason:

This isn't an unblock request. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:18, 8 September 2020 (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.

I have revoked your talk page access. Threats like that have no place here. Another admin will be along shortly to review your request. If declined, you still have WP:UTRS open to you. --Yamla (talk) 17:44, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

UTRS 34348[edit]

User requested unblocking at UTRS. The request is now closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS 36496[edit]

UTRS appeal #36496 is now closed

deepfriedokra 2020-10-29 11:12:06 I'm sorry, but as you have repeatedly inadequately addressed the reasons for your block, you are now ineligible for consideration at UTRS until six months from now. Please consider spending that time constructively and collegially editing other Wikimedia projects and other versions of Wikipedia. Please do not evade your block or use sock puppets. After at least six months of constructive, collegial editing have passed, you may again request unblocking. Please describe in greater detail how your editing was unconstructive and how you would edit constructively if unblocked Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks) --Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]