User talk:Novjunulo

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such unreasonable information or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, and will result in your account being blocked.

[ The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

I have also reverted your comment to Talk:A Defense of Abortion. Please read WP:TALK. Talk pages are not for debating the topic of articles, but instead are there as a way for editors to discuss changes and issues with the article's text. Thanks.-Andrew c ^[talk] 15:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Value of a dollar[edit]

A tag has been placed on Value of a dollar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under 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.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Anthony Rupert (talk) 16:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The value of a dollar is an age old question that has been featured on many TV programs. It is something that all children should be taught, and if their parents are too busy, a Wikipedia would benefit them and their development greatly. Novjunulo (talk) 16:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unblock[edit]

I would like to be unblocked, as I am not a sockpuppet. I forgot the password for Junulo. Novjunulo (talk) 22:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also worked hard on this account's user page, so could someone please move it to User:Junulo if you don't unblock this one? I would also like to point out that the block on Junulo has expired.

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).

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

Request reason:

This has become my main account (I worked hard on the Userpage and I forgot Junulo's password.). Please block Junulo instead.

Decline reason:

Your request is accepted, however you are not unblocked yet, hence the use of this version of the template. User:Junulo was re-blocked on March 10 due to the checkuser case filed against you. I will transfer the remainder of that block here, and block Junulo indefinitely, as this account was. When your block expires (in about 2 1/2 weeks), take care to abide by policy and make only constructive edits with this account. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:07, 22 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.

restoring user page[edit]

I just noticed your unblock request. I've restored your user page in an assumption of good faith. In future if you loose / forget your password please notify a sysop rather than creating a new account--Cailil ^talk 17:04, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prenate[edit]

I wish I could just fix this. I am surprized that Wikipedia has no article for prenate. It does have zygote, blastocyst, embryo, and fetus, however. Could someone please start the article? Novjunulo (talk) 21:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. ☺ (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prenate[edit]

This article has been nominated for deletion. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Doo-doo doo doodoo doo (doo). Doo doo doo, doo-doo doodoo, doodoodoodoo; doo-doo doo doodoodoo. Doodoodoo-doo doo doodoodoo doodoodoo doodoo-doodoo doo doo-doodoo. Doodoodoo doo doodoodoo doodoodoo doo doo-doo-doo...[edit]

A tag has been placed on Doo-doo doo doodoo doo (doo). Doo doo doo, doo-doo doodoo, doodoodoodoo; doo-doo doo doodoodoo. Doodoodoo-doo doo doodoodoo doodoodoo doodoo-doodoo doo doo-doodoo. Doodoodoo doo doodoodoo doodoodoo doo doo-doo-doo..., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Tomayres (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008[edit]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, such as Doo-doo doo doodoo doo (doo). Doo doo doo, doo-doo doodoo, doodoodoodoo; doo-doo doo doodoodoo. Doodoodoo-doo doo doodoodoo doodoodoo doodoo-doodoo doo doo-doodoo. Doodoodoo doo doodoodoo doodoodoo doo doo-doo-doo..., you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I applaud you on the attempt, however :-p Which song was it? Xavexgoem (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC) Mario World 1-1. REdirects are not supposed to have content! That would be pointless. ☺ (talk) 19:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 weeks in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeatedly creating inappropriate pages after warnings. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Oxymoron⁸³ 19:57, 22 April 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).

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

Request reason:

your reason here

Decline reason:

No reason given to lift block. — Yamla (talk) 20:02, 22 April 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).

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

Request reason:

Redirects are not SUPPOSED to have content!

Decline reason:

Redirects are supposed to have reasonable titles, however. Your addition was deleted as vandalism. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:21, 23 April 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).

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

Request reason:

An extra redirect only helps those who search for it, and does not affect anyone else.

Decline reason:

Redirect titles can't be unreasonably long any more than article titles can. — Daniel Case (talk) 21:00, 3 June 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.

Personal Attacks[edit]

Calling me ageist is unfounded. Acceptance of laws to protect children and others does not make one ageist. I find this insulting and take it personally as an insult to the way in which I raise my own children. Seeing as you know nothing about me or my motivations, aside from the personal attacks on others which I have made and been castigated for, I consider this an unwarranted attack. I await your apology, and hope we can do this without any further escalation. :) poochie (talk) 22:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't hold your breath. Some supported sexist laws because they felt they "protected" women. ☺ (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 2008[edit]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. For vandalizing redirects on Feedback loop and WP:GF and also vandalism at Louise Brown. These are your first edits after returning from a block for creating nonsense pages - a block that was shortly preceded by one for sock-puppetry.

Disruption of Wikipedia is taken seriously, further disruption will be reported for sysop attention Cailil ^talk 21:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Safe cupcake amendment[edit]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Safe cupcake amendment, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Safe cupcake amendment[edit]

A tag has been placed on Safe cupcake amendment 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.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Vianello (talk) 04:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of video game consoles (zeroth generation)[edit]

A tag has been placed on History of video game consoles (zeroth generation), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. 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.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Quantumobserver (talk) 04:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008[edit]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing. Really, you've been around long enough to know better. "I did it for the lulz" indicates premeditation. Jclemens (talk) 06:59, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the history of this account (and its sock-puppet) and its contribution to Template:VG history, it is clear that User:Novjunulo is not here to develop the project. This is your final warning Novjunulo, any further disruption will result in sanctions--Cailil ^talk 16:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I HAVE NEVER CREATED A SOCKPUPPET! I created this account because I forgot the old account's password. ✏✎✍✌✉✈✇✆✃✄Ⓠ‽ (talk) 22:42, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Junulo--Cailil ^talk 23:21, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YES, and I JUST explained that. In fact, I'm pretty sure I explained it on the page you linked to! ✍ (talk) 17:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 9 weeks in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy. Novjunulo you were warned enough times not to continue making disruptive and nonsenses edits to wikipedia. You have continued to do so[1][2]. Your last block was for 6 weeks in April. Since that time your disruption of this project has continued. You are being blocked for 9 weeks to prevent further disruption of wikipedia. If you have a problem with this block please use the normal process of unblock request to appeal it. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Cailil ^talk 23:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron[edit]

Hello, Novjunulo. Based on the templates on your talk page, I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. Article Rescue Members are not necessarily inclusionists, all wikipedians are warmly welcome to join.~~~~

June 2009[edit]

Be wp:civil. Bubba73 (talk), 20:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Latin@" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect Latin@ has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 3 § Latin@ until a consensus is reached. --MikutoH ^talk! 01:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]