User talk:Seasider53/Archive 1

Disambiguation link notification for November 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2019–20 Blackpool F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Howard ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/2019%E2%80%9320_Blackpool_F.C._season check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/2019%E2%80%9320_Blackpool_F.C._season?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) 07:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Handy&#39;s 2008.jpeg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Handy&, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 17:26, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Handy& listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Handy&, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hartwell Tavern, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cellar ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Hartwell_Tavern check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Hartwell_Tavern?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

2019–20 Reading F.C. season Edits
Hi there, I understand the removal of previous team from trialists, but not the removal of column for released players new teams, as this is relevant information. --Dave logic (talk) 07:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Infobox heading
Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. Welcome to Wikipedia! I just wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions were not quite right. When updating statistics within the infobox of a footballer, please make sure you update the timestamp at the same time, so that both readers and fellow editors know when the information was last updated.

You can do this by replacing the existing timestamp within the club-update or pcupdate parameter for club stats, or the nationalteam-update or ntupdate parameter for international stats. For articles that use a DMY date format, use five tildes, or for MDY dates, use mdytime. This will generate the specific time the update was made.

If you have any questions about this, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:40, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

please update name and logo of east bengal fc https://www.facebook.com/EastBengalOfficial/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.23.241 (talk) 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

MOS:NICKNAME
Hello. I think you might be misinterpreting what the MoS requires.

The MoS says specifically "If a person is known by a nickname used in lieu of or in addition to a given name, and it is not a common hypocorism of one of their names, or a professional alias, it is usually presented between double quotation marks following the last given name or initial" (my highlighting). Joe Lane's given names are James Charles, so the nickname Joe isn't a hypocorism of either of his given names; if one of his names was Joseph, as at Charles Joseph John Hart, the Joe wouldn't appear.

If you think it's me that's wrong, please could you explain why, and perhaps we could get further opinions if necessary. Thanks, Struway2 (talk) 09:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)


 * That makes sense. What should happen at, say, Ted MacDougall though? Not everyone knows that Ted is an hypocorism of Edward. - Seasider53 (talk) 11:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Footnote d at MOS:NICKNAME refers to Hypocorism, and advises treating anything listed there in the first two subsections, "Shortening, often to the first syllable" and "Addition of a diminutive suffix" as likely common hypocorisms, but the third subsection, "A short form that differs significantly from the name", as likely not common. However... Ted appears in both "shortening" and "differs significantly" subsections, which implies that it comes down to common sense/personal opinion: if you think Ted would be widely recognised by English speakers as a common hypocorism of Edward, then treat it as such. Some of the names listed there I've never even come across, let alone recognise as a common shortening of anything. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:41, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Danny Hansford.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Danny Hansford.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wikiacc (¶) 04:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

The Olde Pink House photo
You removed a photo from The Olde Pink House, saying that it is not the right building. It sure looks like the same one to me. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I was by there today and took a photo of the copy. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:16, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1762 in the United States


A tag has been placed on Category:1762 in the United States requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 deleted 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. Liz Read! Talk! 13:27, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dundee West railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gleneagles ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Dundee_West_railway_station check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Dundee_West_railway_station?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Seasider53

Thank you for creating Longhurst Lodge.

User:Girth Summit, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Girth Summit  (blether) 13:42, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Green Man at Inglewhite


A tag has been placed on The Green Man at Inglewhite requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 deleted 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. Ingratis (talk) 11:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of The Cartford Inn for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Cartford Inn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Cartford Inn until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 20:09, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Griestal-Strauße


A tag has been placed on Griestal-Strauße, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. Ingratis (talk) 23:00, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Zeughauskeller moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Zeughauskeller, does not have enough reliable sources and citations as written to remain published. Travel guides are not reliable sources for establishing notability. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  DGG ( talk ) 00:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Zeughauskeller (June 5)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Spicy was:

The comment the reviewer left 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 Draft:Zeughauskeller and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Zeughauskeller, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Zeughauskeller Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Spicy&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Zeughauskeller reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Spicy (talk) 00:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Released players
Players will not be released until their contract ends on 30 June. They remain with their clubs until that date. GiantSnowman 16:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Please also note that, as far as squad templates are concerned, players retain their squad numbers until such time as new numbers are announced. That is the way we have always done it. GiantSnowman 16:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not a big deal, though, right? Perspective and all that. - Seasider53 (talk) 17:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Coylet Inn for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Coylet Inn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Coylet Inn until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Girth Summit  (blether) 13:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi - just a note to kind of apologise for doing this. I see you're having a number of articles nominated for deletion above - I'm sorry to be doing it to you again, I can't imagine it's much fun. I hope that folk are able to dig up some sources that would establish notability, and will happily withdraw if they are able to. If you ever want to have a chat about notability, sourcing, or what a reviewer is looking for when they come across a new article, drop me a note. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  13:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Morris Young Ltd. for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Morris Young Ltd. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Morris Young Ltd. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ingratis (talk) 15:50, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wolfe&#39;s Neck Center.png
Thanks for uploading File:Wolfe&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:38, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Rangers F.C. badge
Hi mate.

Wanted to thank you for uploading the new version of the Rangers badge.

Just wanted to ask if you could make a couple of adjustments.

It needs a version uploaded without the blue box border if possible.

And it needs a nfr rationale for the main page but also the Rangers F.C. Under 20's and Academy page and the Rangers W.F.C. page.

Sorry to ask this as I appreciate your hard work. I'm useless at image uploading etc.

Thanks CoatbridgeChancellor (talk) 00:04, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:This is a logo for Rangers F.C.png
Thanks for uploading File:This is a logo for Rangers F.C.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ardentinny, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drover ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Ardentinny check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Ardentinny?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Hospitals
Hi - Please don't remove the static hospital maps from infoboxes without discussion. I have spent the best part of two years adding infoboxes with static maps to all UK and Irish hospital articles. There is no clear policy on this but I have at least standardised the position. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 22:13, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ribchester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:49, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Redundant?
Hey there. I noticed that you reverted my edit on COVID-19, due to the term "close" being redundant. What is redundant about it: it is usually acquired in closed proximity. I Binged it so that I know the meaning of "redundant": it is "not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous." What is superfluous about the term "close"? Also, if that needs to be erased, then you should erase footnote A. Can you please clarify? Thanks, from  Gerald WL  14:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020
When your bold change of "in close proximity" (a term of art) to "in proximity" was reverted, your next step should be to go to the article talk page and discuss it. Instead you decided to edit-war your preferred version back into the article. That is not acceptable conduct on an article subject to general sanctions. Please take this opportunity to self-revert your second edit and engage in discussion. Failure to do so will leave you open to sanctions. --RexxS (talk) 20:42, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seasider53! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. RexxS (talk) 20:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)


 * 🙄 Seasider53 (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please pay heed to this. I've just reverted your removal of newly added sourced material to the Edinburgh article as you incorrectly marked it as a minor edit and gave no explanation for your action in the edit summary. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, will do. - Seasider53 (talk) 11:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 1. reversion of unxeplained, unsourced alteration, which at least that editor didn't mark as minor and I gave an edit summary giving the benefit of the doubt re their GF. 2 IP sockpuppet of persistent, warring, banned user 3. ditto 2.
 * None of my edits spuriously marked as minor.
 * Do not come the smart individual. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Despite promising, you are persisting with incorrectly marking non-minor edits as minor. Was the promise as disingenuous as it might have appeared? Why are you doing this? It's not as if you don't know now. People may think you are trying to avoid scrutiny on significant changes. Have you actually followed the links to see what count as minor edits? If in doubt, do not mark as minor. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I might add that, aside from the edit at Edinburgh I had no dispute with the edits themselves, just the marking of them as minor. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please take this seriously. I am within an inch of blocking you for disruptive editing. You may only mark an edit as 'minor' if it could never be the subject of a dispute. Adding an infobox has been the subject of continual dispute for years and has resulted in two ArbCom cases. I don't disagree with any of your edits, but you must make them available for review by other editors by not marking them as minor. --RexxS (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Do not come the smart individual. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Despite promising, you are persisting with incorrectly marking non-minor edits as minor. Was the promise as disingenuous as it might have appeared? Why are you doing this? It's not as if you don't know now. People may think you are trying to avoid scrutiny on significant changes. Have you actually followed the links to see what count as minor edits? If in doubt, do not mark as minor. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I might add that, aside from the edit at Edinburgh I had no dispute with the edits themselves, just the marking of them as minor. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please take this seriously. I am within an inch of blocking you for disruptive editing. You may only mark an edit as 'minor' if it could never be the subject of a dispute. Adding an infobox has been the subject of continual dispute for years and has resulted in two ArbCom cases. I don't disagree with any of your edits, but you must make them available for review by other editors by not marking them as minor. --RexxS (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I might add that, aside from the edit at Edinburgh I had no dispute with the edits themselves, just the marking of them as minor. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please take this seriously. I am within an inch of blocking you for disruptive editing. You may only mark an edit as 'minor' if it could never be the subject of a dispute. Adding an infobox has been the subject of continual dispute for years and has resulted in two ArbCom cases. I don't disagree with any of your edits, but you must make them available for review by other editors by not marking them as minor. --RexxS (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please take this seriously. I am within an inch of blocking you for disruptive editing. You may only mark an edit as 'minor' if it could never be the subject of a dispute. Adding an infobox has been the subject of continual dispute for years and has resulted in two ArbCom cases. I don't disagree with any of your edits, but you must make them available for review by other editors by not marking them as minor. --RexxS (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Ways to improve William Fraser (architect)
Hello, Seasider53,

Thank you for creating William Fraser (architect).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

"Find A Grave is not considered to be a reliable source so the article needs other references from reliable sources."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

John B123 (talk) 16:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of William Fraser (architect)


The article William Fraser (architect) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "This article appears to have been copied and pasted without attribution from Draft:William Fraser (architect). See also the comments of the reviewer of the draft expressing concerns about copying."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:13, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi. If there is a problem with William Fraser, architect, can I help sort it out, since I wrote the original draft? Prior to your involvement, I had talks with a couple of other editors, which I thought had been adequately addressed. Most recently (earlier this week), Calliopejen1 told me that William Fraser "qualifies for an article" and asked me to address issues raised by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which I thought I had done sufficiently. I believe you did most of the next stage of editing on the page and when I saw yesterday that the page had gone live I was thrilled and thought you had done a sterling job of editing it. If there is anything I can do to address Robert's concerns and save the article from being deleted, I would be more than happy to assist in that. Please advise. Thank you, and all the best.Ian.fraser1 (talk) 20:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beric Morley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Midlands.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Template:Blackpool F.C. squad
Please do not remove squad numbers or organise by position; the old squad numbers remain valid for our purposes until the new ones are announced. GiantSnowman 16:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I note that this series of changes were all marked as minor, despite being repeatedly notified not to do this unless it is appropriate. If you are somehow struggling to understand WP:MINOR, please play safe and do not mark any of your edits so. Some editors have preferences set that minor edits not be listed in their watchlist, so, as another editor warned you above, to incorrectly mark edits as minor may appear to be an attempt to avoid scrutiny. There are numerous instances above of the questioning of edits that you have made, which is not necessarily a problem, but should reinforce to you that your edit was not minor. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for attempting to avoid scrutiny. 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:. RexxS (talk) 20:43, 19 August 2020 (UTC)