User talk:Richmondky

January 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Willking1979 (talk) 03:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Willking1979 (talk) 17:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Willking1979 (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Willking1979 (talk) 23:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Daniel Mongiardo. --Avant-garde a clue- hexa Chord 2  23:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

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, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

From what I can see, you seem to be removing a section that is properly sourced with no explanation. Removing a section with Verifiable information is normally considered vandalism, and when you do so over and over it is edit warring. When your block is either lifted or expires on its own, I suggest you go to Talk:Daniel Mongiardo to make your case for the removal of the section, and discuss it with the other editors. If the consensus is indeed in your favor, then the section can be removed without editwarring and blocks. Templarion (talk) 01:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
Please refer to the sockpuppetry allegation.

At present, I see no reason to doubt that you have engaged in the use of multiple accounts. It would be appreciated if you could clarify the situation (if you did use multiple accounts, a frank admission and a promise not to do so again is the best way to avoid a long block). Mayalld (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)