User talk:Crunk Specialist

Welcome!

Hello, Crunk Specialist, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Tohru Honda13^{Sign here!} 02:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

warning template[edit]

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Jimbo Wales. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. In the future, please do not add such perverse things on talk pages that have nothing to do with it. Thanks! --Tohru Honda13^{Sign here!} 05:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, just to make things clear, I'm not a guy, I don't think girls are "hot". Secondly, that kind of thing is not allowed here at wikipedia. Please, in the future, think before adding such nature on user talk pages. Some things are permitted, some are not. Please, do not think I am following/harassing you, I am not looking forward to an enemy. Thanks! --Tohru Honda13^{Sign here!} 02:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Slut (disambiguation), 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 take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jmanigold (talk) 22:28, 23 March 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please unblock me. How can you say I vandalised anything? This woman is out to get me if anything. Can't you see?

Decline reason:

I took a random sample of three of your edits and found all three were vandalism. Can you please provide a specific edit you have made that is not vandalism? — Yamla (talk) 19:10, 24 March 2008 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

please look closer. My edit on the "Wall Nook" article is not vandalism. Neither is my addition to the "slut" article, as the "bitches/sluts" term a la racing has been around for years and was appropriately sourced as well. Furthermore, I see no way in which my edit of Hippopotamus article was "vandalism," as i was relating where they lived. I can't believe that you think my contribs. are vandalism. I think it was that female admin that didn't like my edits on the "slut" article.

Decline reason:

One or two good edits does not prove that you intend to be a net benefit to the project. I see lots of really egregious stuff. Instead of trying to claim that you did nothing wrong, which is clearly insincere, perhaps you could show that you understand why you are blocked, and give us some real concrete assurances that you know what quality work is and that you intend to cease being disruptive. That you consider your edits to the slut article beneficial shows that you show little understanding in this direction... — Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:37, 24 March 2008 (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.