User talk:RyanNavilius5

December 2016
Hello, I'm Flyer22 Reborn. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Transform fault have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

November 2016
Congratulations! You have received the Silver Medal Award for being the best Wikipedia contributor in Asia Month! Keep on editing! Wikipedia Staff

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 19)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:RyanNavilius5/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 22:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Recent edit to Qin Shi Huang
Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Josvan  Talk  07:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Granny Torrelli Makes Soup


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Granny Torrelli Makes Soup requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.  CatcherStorm    talk   15:14, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Recent edit to Legalism (Chinese philosophy)
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit that introduces praise or promotional language to the Legalism (Chinese philosophy) article. On Wikipedia, we adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid promotional language or puffery. Please read the NPOV policy page, as well as this page of language to avoid to better understand how to expand this article in a style suitable to an encyclopedia. If you have questions, please see the Help Desk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 09:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

February 2018
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Public forum debate. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Nthep (talk) 15:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

March 2018
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Erwin Rommel has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Erwin Rommel was changed by RyanNavilius5 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.891914 on 2018-03-21T00:00:27+00:00.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Erwin Rommel. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Shellwood (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Erwin Rommel, you may be blocked from editing. Shellwood (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Erwin Rommel. Shellwood (talk) 00:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. OhNo itsJamie Talk 00:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I should definitely be unblocked because the state of me being blocked comes from not citing my sources or factual errors. My editors and I will be working on improving our edits for the future.

Blocked again (2 weeks); the next block will be indefinite
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:05, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Blocked indef
Per this edit, You have been indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your . Vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Note that prior declined requests cannot be removed while the block is in effect. I have restored one. 331dot (talk) 09:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Once again you have removed declined unblock requests while you are still blocked, contrary to Wikipedia policy at WP:BLANKING. I advise that if you do it again you might lose access to this talk page. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)