User talk:BranStark

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

Busted

Ryan, have a look at that amulet-heart girl's userpage. Remember, the one who was talking to me about her userpage? She just got completely busted by an admin, for having about ten different vandalism-dedicated accounts from her IP address. Seemed so innocent too.. Haha, maybe thats why she posted all those pictures of that big-eyed manga girl on her page!ISmellDonuts (talk) 00:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that, maybe she is innocent? Didn't she say it was her brother? I've had incidents in the past where my siblings have vandalised through my IP. Also with school and Uni both being blocked, I've had to have my account given the IP block exemption right so I can still edit. ——RyanLupin • (talk) 09:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

79.73.9.13....

... has been blocked for a short time for harassment following his/her latest edit to this page. nancy ^(talk) 12:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Positive

Much thanks for the award. That person I was talking about managed to get unblocked, by the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ISmellDonuts (talk • contribs)

Yeah I noticed the blocking admin gave her the benefit of the doubt ——RyanLupin • (talk) 14:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Guestbook comment

I nly said it because your link on Jack/ABs leads to your userpage and not your guestbook. Chubbennaitor 16:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Start

Would you say that my contribution to the article about the Reddish Egret would qualify it as a start, rather than a stub?. ISmellDonuts (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Good job, I think the article is definitely a start class so I've made the change for you. Keep it up ——RyanLupin • (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Warning User:Andrewb1 with regard to Fastest with the Mostest

It seems to me that this warning was used incorrectly. The edit mentioned is clearly not vandalism. What is more, it was a single issue notice, which is doubtlessly harsh. I note that this user has been pulled up for other infractions, but a misuse of warning labels such as this should not stand, and I urge you to look at the incident and issue an apology/ point out where I have misunderstood. Thanks, - Toon⁰⁵ 22:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention, I'm unsure as to why I regarded his edit as vandalism. I've removed the warning. Thanks again ——RyanLupin • (talk) 22:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem, these things happen. - Toon⁰⁵ 22:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Favor

Could you help me to remove that strange box in the Long-billed Curlew article? Thanks, ISmellDonuts (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It was because the paragraph was indented. It's a common mistake but is fixed now :) Regards, ——RyanLupin • (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

wtf on what grounds

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=wtf on what grounds |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=wtf on what grounds |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=wtf on what grounds |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}