User talk:JohnDavidsonLA

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for disruptive editing, including personal attack on another editor. 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. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * That block has now been changed to indefinite, as further investigation of your editing history confirms that you were knowingly adding false information from the start. I had been giving you the benefit of the doubt. Please do not remove the block notice or other information relating to the block while the block is in force.JamesBWatson (talk) 15:11, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Can you explain your edits? If so, you may be unblocked.
Another editor has suggested to me that your editing may not, in the first instance, have been vandalism. if this is true, then I will be willing to remove your block, provided you undertake not to attack other editors again. Can you give a link to a source that supports your changes? And can you explain this edit? I took it as meaning that you were making speculative edits to see if people thought the "signings" would be good if they happened. however, if that was not what you meant then please explain what you did mean. I will be happy to unblock if you can explain. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Look i went on the bbc sport website and they said something about carlos tevez and qpr. now as soon as i added his name to QPR squad, it was instantly deleted. i was disgusted at how this ignorant user unedited what i had put as a constructive purpose, without even resaerching to see if it was true the showed horrible arrogance by thinking they knew it all. i had to keep putting the correct thing up every time. then this Mattythewhittey was being rude and threatened to block me because he was to impatient to check if my sources were true. Please unblock my account, i was only trying to add constructive facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnDavidsonLA (talk • contribs) 04:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but you need to cite your sources. That might be why Matty reverted you ... regretfully he chose an automated summary saying he was reverting vandalism, which only inflamed you that much more. If you can post a link to wherever you got this info from maybe we can consider an unblock. Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * (Response to JohnDavidsonLA) I'm afraid playing the victim and painting me as the villain of the piece won't work. The simple fact of the matter is you were knowlingly adding incorrect content to the Queens Park Rangers F.C. page, an action regarded as vandalism on Wikipedia. How you equate BBC Sport saying "something" about Carlos Tevez and QPR as being the same as him joining the club for an undisclosed fee (per this message on my TP), I don't know. Actually, no, I do, because you were simply making it up and intentionally adding false information.  Whinge all you want about me purportedly being ignorant, horrible or whatever, it simply won't wash.  Mattythewhite (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2012 (UTC)