User talk:Romello Brooks

March 2020
Hello, I'm Thepenguin9. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Yo Gotti, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Thepenguin9 (talk''') 04:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Evergreen, Memphis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hyde Park ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Evergreen%2C_Memphis check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Evergreen%2C_Memphis?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Is anybody going to unblock me or what Romello Brooks (talk) 04:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

This user has been attempting to continue evading their block using multiple other accounts. This should count against them in any further unblock request. An appeal under WP:SO could be made no sooner than 2021-01-07, and only if they refrain from all further edits until then. --Yamla (talk) 10:39, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * -- short answer, "no". Long answer, please see all the declines you have already received and the WP:guide to appealing blocks. {reply|Yamla|}} Can we note the various socks here, or does a gentleman not ask? Noting this is a checkuser block. With all this socking, are we at the level of a WP:CBAN as well. -- Deep fried okra  ( talk ) 15:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Please see above. too tired. -- Deep fried okra ( talk ) 15:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Romello Brooks listing one account and Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Romello Brooks listing four. In the past couple of days, they've requested unblocks here, at User talk:Brooks224 (at time of writing, there's one still open there), at User talk:LilT06, and at User talk:ProBro99 which was abusive enough for them to lose talk page access. --Yamla (talk) 15:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

The fact that you created multiple accounts is why we don't trust you. Perhaps explain why you created numerous accounts, after being told not to? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Additionally, note this user has made multiple unblock requests across their various other accounts, making me doubt they have any understanding of WP:SOCK. --Yamla (talk) 13:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

UTRS and unblock discussion
https://utrs-beta.wmflabs.org/appeal/31920 is now closed.

PS- Recommend declining unblock request on this talk page if it is still open. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a place for one to promote oneself. -- Deep fried okra ( talk ) 13:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC) PPS:IMO. six months is overly optimistic. Cheers, -- Deep fried okra  ( talk ) 13:08, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have just revoked TPA for another of their socks. I see an unblock in...maybe a year should they behave. Too many issues to unblock rn, but as I've already decline several of their socks and blocked them, I'm not going to respond to this main request. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk page access revoked
This was totally inappropriate and shows you have no intention of contributing productively. As such, I have revoked talk page access. If you can explain that, WP:UTRS is available. I suggest waiting at least six months, even though you said you had no intention of doing so, then applying under WP:SO. I'll note any further sockpuppetry or block evasion may lead to your ban under WP:3X. --Yamla (talk) 19:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Banned under WP:3X. --Yamla (talk) 19:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.
 * In reply to your question at UTRS, this little stunt here is why you lost talk page access. Conceivably, someone could have seen that and unblocked thinking you were left blocked by mistake. Aside from unblocking someone who should not be unblocked, it would have caused confusion and disruption. So, in addition to having destroyed any trust and assumption of good faith that was left, we just don't want the disruption you might have caused to be repeated/continued. Thanks,  -- Deep fried okra  ( talk ) 01:28, 11 July 2020 (UTC)