User talk:RamReddy420

May 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm Novo Tape. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Judy Ann Santos have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 19:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Judy Ann Santos. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Riverbend21 (talk) 19:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why my edit is vandalism? RamReddy420 (talk) 19:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Pinnularia, you may be blocked from editing. — Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 19:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what edit was vandalism. RamReddy420 (talk) 19:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a bot? RamReddy420 (talk) 19:18, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you don't appear to recognize how your edits are vandalism, you're either trolling or do not have the required skills to edit this project. As such, I've blocked your account to prevent further disruption.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo, this is very wrong and rash of you. My edits were single word edits and you have blocked me. If I have been given proper explanation, we could have resolved this situation. RamReddy420 (talk) 19:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just because they were single-word edits doesn't make them ok (and in fact, one of them was more than a single word). Please read the page on vandalism. — Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 19:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:20, 11 May 2023 (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).

RamReddy420 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

How I am being blocked for only editing a few words in pages. Have I blanked a page. Have I made any major edit that changes the content of the page. I made small simple edits that did not cause any major harm. All I wanted was clear explanations and yet I was not given any. If I can get blocked for this why can't people who edit random stupid stuff in pages get blocked. This is injustice and prejudice. I would like to be unblocked as there is no reason to believe I am a vandaliser. I have made less than 10 edits so how is this decision acceptable.

Decline reason:

This unblock request is offensive. Good block. Yamla (talk) 19:42, 11 May 2023 (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.