Breadinglover
Sup!!!!!! Chicago User with regional, Religious and recreation knowledge. Feel free to comment anytime!
Welcome
edit
|
August 2013
edit
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rock Island, Illinois may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- * [[Villa de Chantal Historic District|Villa de Chantal]] (Catholic, 1978 closure, building destroyed by fire in 2005
- * Audubon Elementary (closed in 2009}
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:34, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Even Stevens may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- * '''Carla and Marla''' ([[Lisa Foiles]] and (Krysten Leigh Jones) - Two girls who looks up to Ren. Carla and Marla are both
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Swaminarayan
editI've seen how your edit got reverted and your post on the talk page of Swaminarayan; it is good you tried to discuss it but don't be surprised when some users are trigger-happy when it comes to reverting and are not open to discussion or consensus. I sure hope you know what you're doing, it is extremely unwise to jump into such controversial articles while starting off here at Wikipedia. If you've looked at the article history, you will notice that just some weeks ago, two users were banned and due to edit warring the article was fully locked. I'm just cautioning you, it is recommended that you edit some non-controversial or obscure articles, so that you get the hang of how things work here. Whatever your decision is, if you need help you can ask me or a more experienced user, just post here or on my talk page. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Breadinglover, you are invited to the Teahouse
edit
|
Hi Breadinglover! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
 | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 13:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC) |
Breadinglover (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello, I woke up this morning to read any responses to my queries of articles' talk pages that wrote on and found out I was banned. What the heck is going on? How am being accused of sock puppetry. Please read [{Wikipedia:Don't be quick to assume that someone is a sockpuppet]]. I am not a sock puppet, have not done anything wrong, and will not do anything wrong unless it is a mistake and it will be corrected if that is the case. I am have been a long time reader of Wikipedia. and have been following the debate raging on certain topics. As a former member of ISSO and BAPS, and currently unaffiliated any religious groups (studying Sai Baba of Shirdi movement}, I am very aware of what people do to keep their groups/deity image clean. I know this first hand from being told to do so no matter what the accusation or wrongdoing was. I have lived in a Zen center too but since it was a small group that created their own set of belief and have only operate as a temporary housing center for travelers, I cannot create an article for that. The religious topics are not the only topics that I believe I can contribute to. I really cannot believe that I am being accused of this. I am not a sock puppet. A trigger happy administrator is blocking anybody who has an opinion those topics. I am requesting that I be unblocked and all my article reverts be undone. I no longer would like to be beleaguered and harassed like this. This is very disappointing because there are so many other sites where you won't get stressed like this. And I have seen the rude comments left my administrators that rather keep people locked out rather than understand why it would cause someone to get angry and get that way. I have no reason to need to contribute but I feel like it is a great starting point for researcher to get started on and I feel that I can contribute to it. I want to and somebody wants to make accusations and block me and that is not fair. Again in a reasonable time, do review this request to be continue to contribute in a proper way by being unblocked. Breadinglover (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Decline reason:
On reviewing your contributions, you do seem to be an obvious sock. Laser brain (talk) 13:34, 30 August 2013 (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.