User talk:Former user 20140220

Welcome

Hello, Moutray2010! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing!  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 15:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Clan Moutray

This article is not ready to be in article space. Would you move it back to your user space to work on until it's ready? Mostly it's just way too long, but some other issues are:

• The references quote long passages from other works; in some cases it looks like entire works are quoted. That is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article; a reference entry in a Wikipedia article should direct the reader to material used as references, not quote the reference.
• Much of the material doesn't seem directly related to Clan Moutray. An article about one clan should not recap general Scottish history.
• Wikipedia articles (from any language Wikipedia) cannot be used as references. Links to Wikipedia articles can be included in "See also".
• Noted members or relatives of the clan don't need their entire biographies in this article. Instead, include a list of them (maybe with brief descriptions), and create separate articles for them.

Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I moved the article to userspace. Please follow the above tips from Auntof6 and try to improve the article. Welcome to Wikipedia! MoozerSkadoozer (talk) 05:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Clan moutray

A tag has been placed on Clan moutray requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 12:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: right direction

Hey..., please don't give up so soon! Consider to read this article >> Wikipedia:MMORPG and maybe you can find other meaning of Wikipedia. Oh, don't forget to typing 4 symbol of tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message to leave your signature. Happy editing.  :-)  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 11:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, your article is not lost, it is at User:Moutray2010/Clan Moutray. I'm willing to help you get it into shape for Wikipedia if you want -- just let me know. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Clan Moutray

Hi Thanks for deleting my wiki page on Clan Moutray. I have back ups fortunately . Do you have any explanation for this ? Otherwise I am going to make a complaint regarding your behaviour . I look forward to recievibg your explanation yours sincerely Paul Moutray

Hi there Paul. The page Clan Moutray was moved to User:Moutray2010/Clan Moutray by User:MoozerSkadoozer on April 29th. The reason given was "‎This article is too long and unorganized to be in article space. Moving to namespace until improvements can be made.". A few minor notes for you:

• Encyclopedia articles are not yours, mine or anyone elses. See: Ownership of articles
• Deleted articles are still there, hidden away. See: Requests for undeletion
• Remember the Trifecta please.

- TB (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Former user 20140220. You have new messages at Auntof6's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Editing the Clan Moutray article

Hi, I got your message on my talk page. When you click on "talk" next to my user name, the message goes on my talk page. I'd rather communicate either here on your talk page, or on the talk page of the article (User talk:Moutray2010/Clan Moutray), whichever is easier for you. To do that, just edit the page and type your reply under the text you're replying to, leaving some space between the old text and your reply. I'm using the "watch" function on both pages, so I'll see it either way. How about if you pick one of those pages, then leave a message about what ideas you have for the article? --Auntof6 (talk) 12:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Aunto ,

I'd rather reply under the article page , as its easier to keep track of the discussion in relation to that article . Thanks regards Paul

John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.drbronsontours.com/bronsonjohnmoultrie.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of St.Andrews Society

The article St.Andrews Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unsourced and reads as WP:original research.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 13:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Use of {{hangon}} isn't correct when and article has been proposed for deletion. Instead you can just remove the {{PROD}} from the article. However to prevent the article being listed for deletion you should expand the article to show why, for example, the society is notable. Currently this isn't clear and doesn't explain anything about the society, what it does etc. NtheP (talk) 16:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

References

Please refer to Help:Footnotes for instructions on how properly to include references in your articles. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America

A tag has been placed on Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

==Speedy deletion Template:Hangon

its not copyright infringement as its taken from Samuel Lewis topographical dictionary , which is out of copyright 200 years ago . just because some other website has also quoted from it , doesnt mean i am infringing the other website, as the other website, is referencing the same UNcopyrighted information that i am ..

remove this block now , and stop wasting my time .

you are incorrect .

nomination of Portclare==

A tag has been placed on Portclare requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. RadioFan (talk) 14:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America

A tag has been placed on Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadioFan (talk) 15:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No context

Your new article has been tagged for deletion for providing "no context". What this means is that you have not given the rest of the Wikipedia community enough context to identify what it is you're trying to write about in this article. There's a lot of information in the article (probably too much to be useful in a single article), but it's not clear what the unifying concept behind all of that information is. Can you please seek help to identify what it is you're trying to write about so that the article can be properly written? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Former user 20140220. You have new messages at WikiDan61's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America

I have nominated Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moutray of Seafield and Roscobie, now of Favour Royal, Co. Tyrone: an Historical and Genealogical memoir of the family in Scotland, England, Ireland and America. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. RadioFan (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:WikiDan61. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010

This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User talk:RadioFan, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. RadioFan (talk) 15:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

William Moutrie

The article on William Moutrie is for information about him, not relatives who may or may not merit their own article. Also articles should be written in an encylcopedic fashion not just a list of one or two line statements followed by a load of links that don't explain what they refer to or support. NtheP (talk) 15:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

email from Moutray 2010 posted

thank you for your comment .

however your opinon is no more valid than mine , so i believe we havea difference of opinion .

who makes you the final arbitrare of who / what is appropriate?

i think you are out of order, adn incorrect.

i stand by my submissions .

i will resubmit if you have altered it .

its about the person , which can include his background , to make it more comprehensive.

who are you to say otherwise ? ?

If you'd written about his background I wouldn't mind but you wrote about his brothers and what they did and are commemorated, that's not relevant to this article. I'm not the final arbiter of who or what is appropriate, wikipedia is a collective effort and has substantive policies to assist in the development of articles. All I beleive I did was to apply these policies correctly. You may believe differently and as you said my opinion is no more valid than yours, all I was doing was offering advice. NtheP (talk) 16:57, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Not your personal genealogical website

Please note that Wikipedia is not your personal genealogical website. While you are clearly passionate about the history of your family, it is not the purpose of Wikipedia to serve as the repository of that history. Many of your family appear to be notable, and such articles are appropriate. However, this edit to Seafield Tower contained vast swaths of irrelevant and unreferenced material, including large sections of untranslated Latin text which does no one any good without a translation. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination???

What nomination? ToxicWasteGrounds 16:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.Template:Do not delete

You have been blocked from editing, for a period of 72 hours, for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Tan | 39 17:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

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).

Former user 20140220 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

""">>>>>

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Former user 20140220 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Please provide a reason as to why you should be unblocked.
Change {{unblock}} to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I have been blocked , due to an allegation of "disruptive editing '

1. i do not meet the criteria for blocking under disruptive editing , and i have not been disruptively editing , therefore remove my block immediately . there is apparently an agenda , to block my rightful , lawful and factual submissions , due to frioulous nonsense reasons ....

i have been threatened with ongoing blocking , by TAN , which i want investigated . I am entitled to submit entries the same as anyone else , and this is an abuse of priviledges.

remove the block immediately . I will escalate this within Wikipedia . this is becoming quite disturbing in its manifestation

review below , the policy that is meant to be followed , in the alegation of disruptive editiing .

---

>>>

Dealing with disruptive editors

Shortcut: WP:DDE Following is a model for remedies, though these steps do not necessarily have to be done in this sequence. In some extreme circumstances a rapid report to WP:ANI may be the best first step; in others, a fast track to a community ban may be in order. But in general, most situations can benefit from a gradual escalation, with hope that each step may help resolve the problem, such that further steps are not needed: First unencyclopedic entry by what appears to be a disruptive editor. Assume good faith. Do not attack the author who you suspect is disruptive. However, revert uncited or unencyclopedic material. Use an edit summary which describes the problem in non-inflammatory terms. Stay very civil. Post to talk page asking for discussion and/or sources. Consult Do not bite the newcomers, and be aware that you may be dealing with someone who is new and confused, rather than a problem editor. If editor unreverts: Revert again if they haven't responded at the talkpage. Ensure that a clear explanation for the difference in opinion is posted by you at the article talkpage. Refer to this thread in your edit summary. If possible, suggest compromises at the talkpage. If the reverting continues, and they are inserting unsourced information: Revert, and request an administrator via Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (ANI). Provide diffs of the multiple reverts by the tendentious editor. Keep your post short (no more than 250-500 words), well-diffed (multiple diffs showing evidence), and focus on user conduct issues (the tendentious editor is not engaging in discussion / is inserting unsourced information / is ignoring talkpage consensus). Try to avoid going into detailed article content issues at ANI, as it may reduce the likelihood that an admin will understand the complaint. Note: To be most successful at ANI, your own history must be clean. At all times, stay civil, and avoid engaging in multiple reverts yourself. If the tendentious editor is using sources, but if the sources are bad or misinterpreted: Do not go to ANI yet. Review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. File a report at the Reliable Sources noticeboard, if appropriate. Continue attempts to engage new editor in dialogue. Refer to policies and guidelines as appropriate. If only two editors are involved, seek a Third Opinion. If more editors are involved, try a Request for comment. Suggest Mediation. If mediation is rejected, unsuccessful, and/or the problems continue: Notify the editor you find disruptive, on their user talkpage. Include diffs of the problematic behavior. Use a section name and/or edit summary to clearly indicate that you view their behavior as disruptive, but avoid being unnecessarily provocative. Remember, you're still trying to de-escalate the situation. If other editors are involved, they should post their own comments too, to make it clear that the community disapproves of the tendentious behavior. Tendentious editor continues reverting. Assuming that it's one editor against many at this point, continue reverting the tendentious editor. If s/he exceeds three reverts in a 24-hour period, file a report at WP:3RR (but be careful you don't do excessive reverts yourself!). However, one tendentious editor cannot maintain problematic content in the face of multiple other editors reverting his/her edits. If the tendentious editor is not violating 3RR, or there aren't enough editors involved to enforce Wikipedia policies: File another ANI report. If for some reason administrators do not respond: File a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, but only if you have multiple diffs to show that you have tried to address the problem via other means, and you have at least one other editor who has attempted to resolve the problem, and will help certify the RfC. Editor continues to ignore consensus of the RfC. Again request assistance at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for administrator intervention, point to consensus from the User Conduct RfC. An admin should issue a warning or temporary block as appropriate. If blocks fail to solve the problem, or you are still unable to obtain attention via ANI, and all other avenues have been tried: File a case for the Arbitration Committee to review. Base it strictly on user conduct, and not on article content. [edit]Blocking and sanctions for disruption

Disruptive editing may result in warnings and then escalating blocks, typically starting with 24 hours. Accounts used primarily for disruption may be blocked indefinitely. If a pattern of disruption is subtle or long term, and informal discussions are ineffective, a user conduct request for comments may be used to document the problem and establish a consensus for a editing restriction or community ban. [edit]Wikilove

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiLove It is important to be as patient and kind as possible. Techniques such as reverting need to be combined with sincere efforts to turn the user toward productive work. Only when editors show themselves unwilling or unable to set issues aside and work harmoniously with others, for the benefit of the project, should they be regarded as irredeemable, and politely but firmly removed.

.............................

i will escalate this @

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

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.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Former user 20140220 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Please provide a reason as to why you should be unblocked.
Change {{unblock}} to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

i want this reviewed by someone else . to look at this independently .

rather than you making blanket statements, why dont YOU , tell me exactly where your objection is whith what i have written , instead of bLANKET blocking my submissino .

here is an example , from above 

A tag has been placed on Clan moutray requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia

1. wikidan , has said " yes, some of your family are notable' .. so why have i had this blocked ? 2. i have information in REAL , encyclopedias, national archives etc, but you MORONS are more important than that @!!! , you can decide that something is not notable ... delete within 5 mins , then when i take issue with it ,... .then you block me ... .for " disruptive editing "... syou can delete my entries, then when i add informaiton , then you block me for " disruptive editiing"

explain to me how i am " disruptively editing

---

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.

Paul, please note that "Your reason here" will not get you unblocked. You actually have to give a reason. ToxicWasteGrounds 17:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

yes , i want to appeal the block .

1. i am providing information , of historical record . 2. i am finding my informatino deleted , by speedy deletion , in less than 30 mins , adn sometimes 5 mins . 3. in frustratino i have addressed my discontent with the behavoiur , in particular , wikidan , radiofan , and tan , who have now , attempted to block me , which i believe is an abuse of their position . this woudl not be permitted in real life situation , where they are pushing users who are attempting to contribute , simply when i am on a learning curve .

yes i know this is not a personal genealogical website, however, when there is information of historical fact, adn i am in a postion to know this , as it is something i have researched, then i am adding it , to find that it is blocked under miniscule frivolous reasons, without proper explanation . when i complain and object to it , then i am finding myself blocked , eg what is the reason that Tan has blocked me . i believe there should be a penalty on those who are using blocks inappropriately , all i can do is appeal to logic .

if there is a historical fact, that is included in encyclopedias, in national archives, in scotland and washington , there are places , whos history corroborates the infomation , then i dont dont see why i am having my entries deleted , regardless of whether they are family members or not , if presidents and kings have honoured them as notable , and noteworthy , eg the peerage , debretts , then who are these petty 'editors' to say that i cant add these facts?

even when i link to other books , eg raineval , other families have provided links to their family , but then when i do it , then its put up for speedy deletion , give me some explanation , otherwise i am going to collect all this information and complain directly to wikipedia . i think it is either , incompetence or negligence in the way i have been treated.

i dont see why anyone woudl waste their time , to contrinute work , charitably, to be treated in this manner ,

i have recieved complaints from other people who have got frustrated at deletionists and pettiness , that they havent bothered to continue to contribute .

time for some common sense .

i look forward to recieving satisfactory response . this is harrassment , and im not happy to have information misrepresented , as i dont like the slant of the incorrect informaiotn you have redistributed .

yours sincerely paul

Wikipedia is not your personal blog; you haven't read any of the applicable policies and instead play the victim persistently. There's a reason all your contributions have been deleted. If you opt not to conform to our policies, you will be immediately re-blocked indefinitely. Tan | 39 17:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

And if you continue to insult other editors, you will also be reblocked indefinitely. Please read WP:AGF. You don't seem interested in learning how to be a good editor, you are simply asserting that you are right and others are (and here you put various insults). 72 hours isn't long, why not calm down, read the various links you've been given, and ask what you should do to make better articles? You also need to stop plagiarising other articles and in particular avoid copyright violations, I've removed the ones I could find. Dougweller (talk) 18:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

For when you return from your block:

Hello, Former user 20140220. You have new messages at WikiDan61's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Paul, while you are blocked, you really should read the links that WikiDan61 has provided, the conflict of interest guidelines, WP:NPA, etc. if you wish your articles and edits to survive and continue to edit. Dougweller (talk) 17:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I would also strongly recommend that you learn about how to cite your sources, as that is how information is verified on Wikipedia. Click here for an introduction. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your comments that I am abusing my position, I have no position. I'm an editor just like you. All I can do is bring issues to the attention of administrators. I, and a number of other editors as you noted above, have identified a number of editing issues to you and finally to administrators. When your block expires, you should consider taking a step back and review Wikipedia:Your first article for good information on what is expected of all editors, particularly in citing sources.--RadioFan (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problems with John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant

Hello. Concerning your contribution, John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.drbronsontours.com/bronsonjohnmoultrie.html. As a copyright violation, John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:John Moultrie, Lieutenant Governor of East Florida under Governor Grant.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Although I have found other blatant copyright violations and plagiarism, this article was simply plagiarism, lifted from a 1947 South Carolina journal by the writer at drbronsontours. I've removed the speedy delete and noted on the talk page that it is plagiarism. Dougweller (talk) 18:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Attribution

Please note, that even if you copy material from public domain sources as at John Moutray, you should use the appropriate or otherwise indicate that it is a word-for-word copy. Thanks! VernoWhitney (talk) 17:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)