User talk:Rsfontenot

October 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Barack Obama has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. ... discospinster _talk 01:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Barack Obama, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you.

Also, your belief that Obama is not a U.S. citizen is a fringe theory that is discussed at Talk:Barack Obama in the FAQs. This is the second time you've tried to add such nonsense to the article. Please don't do it again. ~ priyanath ^talk 06:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Barack Obama. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Cosmic Latte (talk) 06:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop[edit]

Read the article probation notice above. It will inform you that if you try to add that nonsense again, you will be blocked. I notice you also vandalised the article two weeks ago by changing his party affiliation to "Communist". ~ priyanath ^talk 06:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. — IP75 (talk) 06:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked for 24 hours under the authority of Talk:Barack_Obama/Article_probation for repeatedly inserting poorly sourced information into the article Barack Obama after being warned of the article's probation status. A log of this block will be made here. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest it by placing the text {{unblock|reason}} under this message. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 06:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having repeated the behaviour which just got you blocked, you have been blocked again, according to Wikipedia:Blocking policy and in accordance with the article probation in effect at Barack Obama. As before, you may contest this block by posting {{unblock|reason}} after this message. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 18:36, 3 November 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).

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

Request reason:

The Truth must be known. It is true. There are too many sources.

Decline reason:

Wikipedia does not publish The Truth(©,®,TM, all rights reserved). Instead, we publish facts verifiable through reliable, independent secondary third-party sources. Next block will probably be indefinite. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 18:54, 3 November 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.

March 2009[edit]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Barack Obama, you will be blocked from editing. Acalamari 23:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Barack Obama, you will be blocked from editing. This is the second time in 10 minutes you have added unsourced material after being warned. The indefinate block is probably on its way. Enjoy. Newguy34 (talk) 23:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In accordance with your past warnings and blocks, and by the fact that all your recent edits have been to disrupt Barack Obama, this account has been blocked indefinitely. In order to be unblocked, you will have to cease your edits to Barack Obama, and instead, discuss on the talk page. Thank you. Acalamari 23:35, 14 March 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Only speaking the truth.

Decline reason:

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. See Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks if you are remotely serious about being unblock. Next time, if I see you, I'll protect you from misusing this page. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:16, 28 April 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Quit being a Pinko and remove this block. this was the truth and verifiable.

Decline reason:

Please be civil in your unblock requests.
I see that when other users complained about your edits, you just repeated them in stead of attempting to communicate with the other users.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:40, 21 May 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Don't know why I am blocked

Decline reason:

Everything you deleted from this page -- and that I've restored -- explains adequately why you are blocked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:51, 26 November 2013 (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.