User talk:Anshikaescorts

Recent edit to Sexual reproduction
Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Dcirovic (talk) 06:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. "good faith" above, I can not agree with. comp.arch (talk) 10:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing, because this account has been used only for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to Wikipedia's content policy. Also, your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group, which is against Wikipedia's policy: an account is for an individual, not a group. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free advertising service.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text at the bottom of this page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. GorillaWarfare (talk) 12:38, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, didn't know about the username policy, "obviously profane" hmm.. but yes, other criteria there fits. And from other: "has been used only for advertising or promotion" is true. I was looking for a reason to block, but seemed you must give notice first. Good to know the extra ammunition. I assume your block fits policy. It's not even the spam that bothers me the most; but the vandalism of preexisting content in the process.. Not saying not changing other links/content would be much better.. Maybe this is the way of spammers to try to avoid [automatic] detection.. IT DIDN'T work, at least human detection got you now spammer.. comp.arch (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC)