User talk:Eolai1

December 2007
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Shell babelfish 18:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

January 2008
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

Speedy deletion nomination of "melanie o'reilly"
A tag has been placed on "melanie o'reilly" requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 02:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2011
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 20:06, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources
Hi. I have closed a report concerning you at the edit warring noticeboard as no violation because the edits in question were over the course of several years, but I would like to take a moment to let you know about the reliable sources and external links policies. External sites such as the one you added at that contain unverified claims or are personal blogs are almost always inappropriate, particularly when they are being used to source a controversial claim. --B (talk) 16:41, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Ferdinand von Prondzynski
Please look over our neutral point of view policy, our biographies of living persons policy, and our policy on original research before editing this article again. Your edits were correctly reverted; what you wrote had no basis in the cited sources and they painted a one-sided view of this person.  Them From  Space  14:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * This also goes for Director of Corporate Enforcement and Mother Records. Wikipedia is not a place for you to disparge people and companies, nor is it a place for you to insert your opinions on our subjects. Please stop this style of editing... continuing to misuse Wikipedia will probably result in you being blocked from further editing.  Them From  Space  14:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing.  Them From  Space  11:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  Them From  Space  21:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for As editors have pointed out to you above, your editors are a violation of our policies requiring neutrality and reliable sources, as well as including original research in articles. Please review these linked policies and take care to follow them after your block.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Eolai1 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page.  Them From  Space  17:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2011
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for editing with a second account to circumvent a block. See Sockpuppet investigations/Eolai1. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Escalated to only warning since you made the same edit that got you blocked in the first place.  Them From  Space  01:48, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for for resuming the kind of behavior that has previously led to your account being blocked. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Favonian (talk) 16:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)