Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 16:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

Hi Keelan717! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. We hope to see you there! Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 04:33, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. For others to be able to see your RfA/RfB, you must transclude the request. You may do so by doing the following; Remove the <!-- and --> around subst: in the template (as well as this comment) once you transclude this request. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 06:52, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to want to be an administrator or bureaucrat. I apologize if I offend you, but you need to spend more time editing here. A lot more time. It's waaaay too soon for you to be thinking about either of these positions. You need to demonstrate responsibility through your contributions and interactions with other editors. I can assure you that any attempt on your part to apply for these positions will end in utter rejection, even if you have prior experience on Wikia.

I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 12:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, I linked to the wrong essay above. You'll want to check out this one instead. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 13:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• i have closed the crat request early. Sorry, but you have no chance. Rcsprinter (rap) @ 14:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keelan717, you may not be aware but Wikipedia has a policy against sock puppetry. There are a number uses of different accounts and IP address which are prohibited, this includes using them to create the illusion of support or to influence discussion as you seem to have been trying to do on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Keelan717. If you would like further information or help please feel free to ask on my talk page. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Keelan717. This is to let you know that I have closed your RfA already as unsuccessful. There is no chance that the community will promote a user with so little experience. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you're starting to attract a lot of attention for the wrong reasons. This is a new account, but its behavior makes it clear that you're quite familiar with Wikipedia. Either you are immature and playing around, or you're an old user with an axe to grind trying to be disruptive, but either way if you continue on the same path you've been on, it will not end well for you. Please change your behavior, and start working on building the encyclopedia, because if you don't, you may be asked to leave. Consider this your final warning on the matter. --Jayron32 15:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Wikipedia:Successful bureaucratship candidacies, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Impersonating a bureaucrat [1] Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ironholds (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

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).

Keelan717 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I do not remember "abusing multiple accounts" 86.42.159.227 (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please log in to request unblock, or we have no idea who's talking -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:49, 2 September 2012 (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).

Keelan717 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I do not remember "vandalising multiple accounts". Keelan717 (talk) 17:52, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Nice try.

---

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.

The reason given was "abusing multiple accounts". -- Trevj (talk) 18:13, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your access to this page has been revoked due to repeated abuse of the unblock template. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 18:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Email access revoked due to abuse of the Emailuser function. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 18:49, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]