User talk:$imbeio$i$

March 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Honshu, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Shikoku. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

I still have trouble adding citations $imbeio$i$ (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Honshu. The number you added was wrong, which I have corrected. I think perhaps you mathematically misused the citation you found. Be advised that competence is required to edit Wikipedia. Because your edits continually seem disruptive, further problems may result in a block. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:43, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

The source I used is taken from Statista.com., which gives the total coastal length of all Japanese prefectures in 2014 (the total for Honshu obviously includes all prefectures located on that island). So stop accusing me of vandalism because the source is real and so are the figures, I just had trouble with correcting the reference. Thanks bye!!! $imbeio$i$ (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 19:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I absolutely do not comprehend me being blocked!! I try by all means to add constructive and reliable sources to my edits. Individuals who revert my edits are ignorant small-minded twerp who fail to do a background check on my sources' reliability and that shouldn't be made to be my problem. I love sharing new information with the world and adding trustworthy sources that supports that info goes without saying. Please consider lifting my blockage as there's nothing disruptive about my edits

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=I absolutely do not comprehend me being blocked!!  I try by all means to add constructive and reliable sources to my edits.  Individuals who revert my edits are ignorant small-minded twerp who  fail to do a background check on my sources' reliability and that shouldn't be made to be my problem. I love sharing new information with the world and adding trustworthy sources that supports that info goes without saying. Please consider lifting my blockage as there's nothing disruptive about my edits |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=I absolutely do not comprehend me being blocked!!  I try by all means to add constructive and reliable sources to my edits.  Individuals who revert my edits are ignorant small-minded twerp who  fail to do a background check on my sources' reliability and that shouldn't be made to be my problem. I love sharing new information with the world and adding trustworthy sources that supports that info goes without saying. Please consider lifting my blockage as there's nothing disruptive about my edits |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=I absolutely do not comprehend me being blocked!!  I try by all means to add constructive and reliable sources to my edits.  Individuals who revert my edits are ignorant small-minded twerp who  fail to do a background check on my sources' reliability and that shouldn't be made to be my problem. I love sharing new information with the world and adding trustworthy sources that supports that info goes without saying. Please consider lifting my blockage as there's nothing disruptive about my edits |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Kind regards $imbeio$i$ $imbeio$i$ (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]