User talk:Apaige331

October 2013
Hello, I'm Qwyrxian. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Gurbaksh Chahal without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 06:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Please stop removing that information from that article without providing a reason. It appears to be reliably sourced. The subject formally and legally admitted guilt. That means it meets our rules on the reporting of crimes by living people. Is there some specific reason you're removing it? Was there a later withdrawal of the charges? Or something else which would make this not relevant? Qwyrxian (talk) 22:22, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * At this point, because you are refusing to communicate, I can only assume that you are either just POV-pushing or vandalizing the article. As such, I have to formally warn you that if you continue to remove that information without providing an explanation, you are going to be blocked. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for repeatedly removing the same sourced information, despite it being explained that it should remain unless you provide a reason. To date, you have not even attempted to communicate with anyone. Please, you can discuss the matter, but we don't remove things just because they are negative. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for Continuing the same removals as before. Next time, I'll make the block much much longer. Stop. Go to the article's talk page and discuss the matter. If you don't...you're just going to be continually reblocked, eventually indefinitely. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:34, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for continuing the same behavior as before. This is your last chance--if you repeat that behavior after the block expires, you'll be blocked indefinitely next time. Please either discuss the matter or stop removing it. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have extended your block for an additional 1 month because of you created a new account, User:Autumn19, to evade this block and make the same disruptive edits. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)