User talk:SuperSuperSmarty
November 2019[edit]
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:28, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Advice on avoiding further blocks[edit]
- I will remind you, since it was over a year ago and you may not remember, of the situation the last time you were blocked. It became apparent from your talk page posts that you were honestly unable to see why your reference desk posts seemed to other editors to be unconstructive. To resolve the problem you suggested a ban on reference desk editing. Three administrators agreed that it was acceptable for you to be unblocked conditional on your not editing at the reference desks. (In fact the block, which was for a very short time, expired before that unblock took place.) As you will presumably know, since you have probably seen the block log reason, you are now blocked again, for a longer time, because of reference desk posts which were seen as unconstructive. As far as I know there have not been problems with your editing other than at the reference desks, so I very strongly advise you to give up contributing to the reference desk. Otherwise there is a serious risk that you will eventually be blocked for a very long time, perhaps even indefinitely, which I really hope won't happen. It would be most unfortunate if we were to lose good contributions from you in articles because of problems in another area. JBW (talk) Formerly JamesBWatson 17:38, 9 November 2019 (UTC)