User talk:Caulde

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).

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

Request reason:

Can I think of a reason why you'd want to unblock the account? No. However, I won't be active in the same capacity as I formerly was and I do not seek the mop. I'm just curious to see how the 'ole place is holding up more than a few months on and this will, inevitably, involve having to edit pages. Caulde 13:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Sandstein 13:55, 19 September 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.

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm going to keep this brief. I was blocked due to the fact that for some unknown reason I decided to use my legitimate doppelganger account for the purposes of out-and-out trolling. It's just over a year since then, I've kept my keen interest in Wikipedia and of course it would be of immense benefit to have my IP contribs that I've made over the past few months credited appropriately where anonymity and a continually changing IP address is somewhat irritating. I pledge not to be damaging to the wiki (whether or not that sounds legit to you, it still remains that it is) and I hope that my wiki contribs can continue under this name. As with the last request, the regaining of my former admin capacity is not being resought. Caulde 13:54, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

So, you've been evading your block and you want be unblocked so you won't be evading a block anymore? And you don't know why you went on a 4chan-style vandalism spree? When you figure out why and have stopped evading the block get back to us. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:11, 27 July 2010 (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.

MfD nomination of User:Caulde/sandbox/the getaway

User:Caulde/sandbox/the getaway, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Caulde/sandbox/the getaway and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Caulde/sandbox/the getaway during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hamilton (company)

The article Hamilton (company) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 103.6.159.84 (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Adminstats/Caulde

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Template:Adminstats/Caulde, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is an unambiguous misrepresentation of established policy. (See section T2 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:16, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Portal:Merseyside

Portal:Merseyside, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Merseyside and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Merseyside during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:13, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Audrey Jones

The article Audrey Jones has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NPOL having only been elected at a local level.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bondegezou (talk) 15:23, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Audrey Jones for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Audrey Jones is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audrey Jones until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bondegezou (talk) 11:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Template:User WikiProject New page

Template:User WikiProject New page, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User WikiProject New page and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User WikiProject New page during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:23, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Template:Uw-spamblock" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Uw-spamblock. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 27#Template:Uw-spamblock until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]