User talk:Danthenando

November 2017
Hello, I'm 331dot. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Ecclesbourne School have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ecclesbourne School. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 11:20, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

UNacceptble
I find it most rude and disturbing that you deleted my addition to The Ecclesbourne School Wikipedia page because Luke Edwards has gone on to work hard as an engineer and has made quite the name for himself with the civil engineering industry and is well known at the school and often mentioned by the teachers there. I assume that the reason your deleting this comments is because you are simply uneducated in the field of engineering and therefore know little about the movements and changes that are occurring within it. So please allow Luke the respect he deserves after the work he's put in. He has also been asked to be a guest speaker at the next prize day at Ecclesbourne to talk about his achievements. So when I edit Luke back into the source please leave him in or else have a very good reason to have taken him out. Thank you, DantheNando
 * It doesn't matter what you or I think of Luke Edwards, or even what the school or his teachers think about him, but what independent reliable sources state about him. If you have such sources, please offer them; otherwise, please stop attempting to add this information, especially worded in such an unencyclopedic manner. 331dot (talk) 11:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

UNacceptable pt2
HOW RUDE! HOW RUDE! I find this most unacceptable and offensive. How can you (someone who has no right to do so) simply wipe the floor of someone personal achievements. I thought communism was dead and gone but no, clearly Mr 331dot is all for it. Karl Marx would be proud. This man has worked all his life for this achievement and he's been robbed of it. So as stated last time I am going to add in my factually correct statement and I hope once again that you actually do some research into Luke Edwards before you try and tell me 'Oooohh that's not right, blah, blah, blah, arse' Thanks, DantheNando

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jim1138 (talk) 11:42, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Ecclesbourne School
To be listed as "notable", one must meet wp:notability (people). They should have a Wikipedia article. See wp:listpeople Jim1138 (talk) 11:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * And in order to have a Wikipedia article, they need to be written about indepth in independent reliable sources. His personal achievements are irrelevant unless they are independently documented. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:.  Tide  rolls  12:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Note for any reviewing admin
In considering unblock please take note of this glittering example of maturity.  Tide  rolls  12:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

This user has attempted to engage in block evasion as. --Yamla (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

What previous account? Additionally, note that we never unblock compromised accounts. As you are claiming this account was compromised, it is not eligible for unblock consideration. --Yamla (talk) 15:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

I have revoked talk page access from this user. Compromised accounts are not unblocked. Additionally, there's a history of vandalism and sockpuppetry here. --Yamla (talk) 12:14, 21 November 2017 (UTC)