User talk:Brutonlegend

Welcome! Hello, Brutonlegend, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like The chronology of ezra 7, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Jarkeld (talk) 23:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Chronology of Ezra 7

The article The Chronology of Ezra 7 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book; no evidence it meets the inclusion standard WP:NBOOK.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Glenfarclas (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. Blocked or banned users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are banned, all edits under this account may be reverted.

If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Template:Do not delete Tim Song (talk) 09:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Brutonlegend (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I have made a page that is textually unbiased but is faulty only because it currently lacks enough reference material. I have been labeled a "sockpuppet," but for whom I am not currently aware. Also, I do not have multiple accounts but only one account. I dont feel that I have actually dealt with any individual that has imputed this status on me in a biased fashion or in a way that should impute thier block status upon myself. However, if I'm wrong, please relieve me from being blocked as I now understand the nature of this status and how to avoid it.Brutonlegend (talk) 17:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your first edit was to the talk page of one of Trabucogold's other sockpuppets. And based on a review of your other edits I feel this block is justified. — Daniel Case (talk) 18:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Brutonlegend (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My statements were intended to assess the futility of the discussion. The closing remarks were to show the impossibility of "continuing the discussion" in the manner it was being conducted. It is now clear that I did not succeed in making this point. If anything, I only sought to restore an appropriate environment on the site by carrying the talk elsewhere.

Also, please note that the suspicions that were suggested by my accusers, who I am prevented from facing, are inconclusive and that I hold them to be untrue. Therefore, they should be governed, as I have, for stating those opinions as fact. Their assertions should have no weight in deciding my status. As a new editor to Wikipedia, I only wished to experiment with the editing functions on a topic relevant to the article of my own, which I was yet to write.Brutonlegend (talk) 22:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=My statements were intended to assess the futility of the discussion.  The closing remarks were to show the impossibility of "continuing the discussion" in the manner it was being  conducted.  It is now clear that I did not succeed in making this point.  If anything, I only sought to restore an appropriate environment on the site by carrying the talk elsewhere.<br /><br />Also, please note that the suspicions that were suggested by my accusers, who I am prevented from facing, are inconclusive and that I hold them to be untrue.  Therefore, they should be governed, as I have, for stating those opinions as fact.  Their assertions should have no weight in deciding my status.  As a new editor to Wikipedia, I only wished to experiment with the editing functions on a topic relevant to the article of my own, which I was yet to write.[[User:Brutonlegend|Brutonlegend]] ([[User talk:Brutonlegend#top|talk]]) 22:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=My statements were intended to assess the futility of the discussion.  The closing remarks were to show the impossibility of "continuing the discussion" in the manner it was being  conducted.  It is now clear that I did not succeed in making this point.  If anything, I only sought to restore an appropriate environment on the site by carrying the talk elsewhere.<br /><br />Also, please note that the suspicions that were suggested by my accusers, who I am prevented from facing, are inconclusive and that I hold them to be untrue.  Therefore, they should be governed, as I have, for stating those opinions as fact.  Their assertions should have no weight in deciding my status.  As a new editor to Wikipedia, I only wished to experiment with the editing functions on a topic relevant to the article of my own, which I was yet to write.[[User:Brutonlegend|Brutonlegend]] ([[User talk:Brutonlegend#top|talk]]) 22:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=My statements were intended to assess the futility of the discussion.  The closing remarks were to show the impossibility of "continuing the discussion" in the manner it was being  conducted.  It is now clear that I did not succeed in making this point.  If anything, I only sought to restore an appropriate environment on the site by carrying the talk elsewhere.<br /><br />Also, please note that the suspicions that were suggested by my accusers, who I am prevented from facing, are inconclusive and that I hold them to be untrue.  Therefore, they should be governed, as I have, for stating those opinions as fact.  Their assertions should have no weight in deciding my status.  As a new editor to Wikipedia, I only wished to experiment with the editing functions on a topic relevant to the article of my own, which I was yet to write.[[User:Brutonlegend|Brutonlegend]] ([[User talk:Brutonlegend#top|talk]]) 22:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}