PenningtonClassical

Welcome!

Hello, PenningtonClassical, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Darkness Shines (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

June 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Aryan with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or 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. Tiderolls 00:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi I am not sure what you mean by "non-constructive". In the time you reverted my change, I am certain you did not even have a chance to read the article!PenningtonClassical (talk) 00:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't need to read the article when I see cited content replaced with content complete with "citation needed" tag. What gives? Tiderolls 00:47, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you need to look at the article again. Nothing was replaced. New information was added and the citations are available in the related articles to which links were given.PenningtonClassical (talk) 00:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

You're about two minutes from being blocked. Answer the question. Tiderolls 00:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Tiderolls 01:02, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

• You have convinced me that your disruption will not stop. If you can convince another administrator that you can edit here without disruption, then I will have no objection to this account being unblocked. Tiderolls 01:02, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

somebody was having a bad day here. there was no basis for blocking me other than the fact that the admin disagreed with something (unspecified) that I allegedly did. PenningtonClassical (talk) 00:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

He explained it pretty thoroughly above, and being pissy and blaming other people will not help your cause in any way, shape or form. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:06, 1 September 2012 (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.

Unblock

I'm impressed that you came back to request unblock, PC. However, Daniel was correct in saying your request was a bit of a non-starter. I would prefer that you took some responsibility for your previous actions, but I will consider unblocking you myself if you will accept a mentoring period. Tiderolls 16:29, 1 September 2012 (UTC)