User talk:Llajwa

existence

I haven't seen any evidence that he exists (other than the note that someone purporting to be him left at the top of my talk page!). I think I agree with you that Wikipedia would be more accurate and no less informative if the article were deleted. The article really only says one thing, and we don't know that thing to be true, as there's no citation. - Nunh-huh 22:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard of this Simon Rothschild character either. If he exists, he's probably not notable. I also doubt that the Canadian Northern Railway has been revived -- I think I would have heard about it (outside Wikipedia). Indefatigable 13:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated the article for deletion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon de Rothschild. - Nunh-huh 09:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bolivar

I'll see what I can do. I'll revert what you did, but I'll edit it like you asked. I'd appreciate it if you could tell me if it looks any better by the time I'm done re-editing my post. MarshalN20 00:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rubyfruit Jungle reference

Hi, please could you be careful when removing sections of text that include references. In your recent edit to Rubyfruit Jungle, you removed a citation that was used further down the page, effectively breaking the reference. --Beloved Freak 14:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no problem, easily done! --Beloved Freak 12:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Onager, are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. PxMa 00:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Mule, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 00:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Account blocked, account compromised?

Upon review of your past edit history, the vandalism spree is unusual activity for you and makes me suspect that your account has been compromised. Therefore, I have blocked your account until you can prove that your account has not been compromised. Please use {{unblock}} if you wish to be unblocked. -- Gogo Dodo 00:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mo Willems books AFD

RE Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pigeon Loves Things That Go!: I've done some research into these books, and I think many of them do deserve Wikipedia articles. Look at what I've done with Don't Let the Pigeon Stay Up Late!, for example. I intend to add refs to some of the others, so you might want to reconsider your nomination. Zagalejo^^^ 03:36, 5 November 2007 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked indefinitely due to vandalism in 2007. A "friend" had made a bunch of ridiculous edits, as a joke, from my account, and I was too embarrassed at the time to appeal it. But I can promise it won't happen again. 128.148.194.11 (talk) 13:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This request was made by an IP. If it is you, remember to log in. Since it's been 16 years, though, I would request an account at WP:ACC, and if this block affects that account, request unblock with the new account. 331dot (talk) 14:10, 2 May 2023 (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 accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

This is my second unblock request. I wrote in the first, "I was blocked indefinitely due to vandalism in 2007. A "friend" had made a bunch of ridiculous edits, as a joke, from my account, and I was too embarrassed at the time to appeal it. But I can promise it won't happen again." Admin User:331dot denied it because I made it though an IP, and advised me to request a new account. I'd like to reactivate my old one, though, if possible, because I did a lot of good editing through it. I didn't realize I could still log into it, so I did, to repeat my unblock request. Not trying to be disruptive! Llajwa (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

We generally turn down immediately unblock requests blaming the vandalism on a friend, a WP:BROTHER, a parent, a classmate etc. But 16 years is an awful long time, and it would be pretty silly for an adult to try to re-enable a long-dormant account just to start dumb onager vandalism again Accepting. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 13:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Edits

Did you know that if you had waited four more months to submit your unblock request, you would've had the record for longest time between edits? Schierbecker (talk) 03:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But the record right below that one is yours if you want it. Schierbecker (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty funny, I had no idea! Where is that documented? Llajwa (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC) Llajwa (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]