User talk:Rhubarbfarr

Speedy deletion of Ziloism

A tag has been placed on Ziloism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. CardinalDan (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, such as Ziloism, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a period of 24 hours from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy because your account is being used to create nonsense pages. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:15, 25 September 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

people want a page for this new club

Decline reason:

never mind. Try listening to warnings and advice next time.— Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:35, 25 September 2008 (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.