User talk:Leftyfb

Re: List of portable software deletion
Sorry, I'd rather not email you. Anyway, my reasoning:
 * There were (and still are) too many external links. I removed yours because of the new things I noticed about the site:
 * - It's selling something, which seemed spammy.
 * - When I first checked, it hadn't been updated for a month.
 * - The most important section of the site (arguably) requires registration. These sites are to be avoided per WP:EL.

Since you are the site administrator, you shouldn't advocate that your site appear under that section because it is a conflict of interest. How'd you find out so quickly that your site was removed anyway? Carson 03:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

January 2009
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Tcncv (talk) 01:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Street Fighter Online constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Willking1979 (talk) 02:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove content from pages without explanation, as you did with this edit to Street Fighter Online. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing. Tcncv (talk) 02:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/Leftyfb for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Blueboy96 02:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below.


 * Whatever makes you think that you or anyone else have the right "not to allow the creation of a wikipedia article" about your project? --jpgordon:==( o ) 14:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Jpgordon, since that topic was not the grounds for being blocked/suspended, we can discuss that topic further at a later date. I am only now trying to disprove an incorrect assumption that I am SFOUnderground and prove that I only have a single account on wikipedia. --leftyfb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.112.148.99 (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That sockpuppetry report wasn't proven at all. In fact, it was closed without being completed, as far as I can see. I'm concerned about the legitimacy of this block. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 15:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm inclined to unblock. Other issues can be dealt with, especially since the article no longer exists at all. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * So when does the block actually get removed? --leftyfb