Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Fast & Furious, 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 read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 18:32, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to My Immortal. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Electric Celery (talk) 06:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at My Immortal, you may be blocked from editing. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 18:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding continued genre changing without discussion or sources. If you choose to continue, as you did at Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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.  Spencer^T♦C 19:36, 26 January 2013 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'm not giving personal analysis or opinions, I'm trying to expand articles and add more facts to give more research for people and you can't find these other things in other websites so please unblock me because if you keep me unblocked or unblock me again, I will sue you and the website.

Decline reason:

Considering your block had already expired, this unblock request was a bad idea. I've gone ahead and reblocked this IP for the legal threat above. Kinu ^t/_c 07:56, 28 January 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.

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for violating the no legal threats policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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.  Kinu ^t/_c 07:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to Here Without You, without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Ironic (song), you may be blocked from editing. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Beverly Hills (song). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding continued genre changing without discussion or sources. If you choose to continue, as you did at Lovefool, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 00:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Alice in Chains discography. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Piriczki (talk) 13:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Chop Suey! (song), you may be blocked from editing. I call the big one bitey (talk) 00:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm Ducknish. I noticed that you made a change to an article, System of a Down, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ducknish (talk) 19:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Dirty Little Secret. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Ducknish (talk) 19:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Slide (song) with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 19:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding continued genre changing without discussion or sources. If you choose to continue, as you did at Hand in My Pocket, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did at Chop Suey! (song), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ironic (song). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of six months for disruptive editing including edit warring and genre warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Bbb23 (talk) 00:02, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

After you told me to stop editing incorrectly and the edit warring a few hours ago, I stopped doing it, but I just got blocked? Please unblock me, I didn't do anything after that.

Decline reason:

You did more than enough to warrant being blocked. You were blocked for this exact thing before, so you already knew it was wrong and could get you blocked before you even started doing it again. Unless and until you show some understanding of why this sort of behavior is not tolerated here I can't imagine any admin agreeing to unblock you early. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:24, 28 June 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.