There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --TheAwesomeHwyh 19:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks 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 ~~~~}}.  ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 05:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

I understand the consequences of my actions and realize how i flippantly violated why i was blocked in the first place. i did not intend it as a personal attack. i respectfully ask for clemency on the second block and will make efforts to amend my user page and conduct myself properly while contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you for reading this. Shparhtahn (talk) 15:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

On the basis of your undertakings below concerning your future editing, I am willing to unblock your account. Please make sure you do avoid doing the same things again, as if you are blocked again is less likely that you will be unblocked, and also likely that the block will be for much longer. JBW (talk) 21:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I have looked at your editing over the years, and it is astonishing that you weren't blocked for a long period years ago. I am willing to consider lifting the block, but to do so I would need to see that you genuinely understand what the problems with your editing have been, and that you are willing to undertake not to do those things again. Please note a generic statement such as "I understand the consequences of my actions" is nowhere near enough: you need to explain what "actions" were unacceptable and why, to make it clear that you really do understand. Experience over the years indicates that far more often than not a blocked editor who merely makes a general statement that they understand what they have done wrong, without saying what it is that they have done wrong, actually doesn't understand, and therefore does continue to do the same after the block. JBW (talk) 20:58, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JBW. I understand your position based on some edits that are disagreeable. I would often have good intentions (in my opinion) but I was flippant about the rules and misused 'vandalism' templates as a way to bug people, which is far from the appropriate use of them. I have been childish with using edit summaries inappropriately at times too especially with personal attacks at other users. That isn't cool by far.

What I enjoy about wikipedia and using it productively IS reverting the changes that I see vandals make and making small contributions like grammar adjustments and stuff like that. I know that haranguing people with vandalism templates isn't appropriate nor is any aggressive or vile sounding edit summaries. I won't do that anymore and intend to be professional on my way forward. I would just like to clean up my user page as well and be more serious about my edits moving forward. I understand that I probably haven't covered every inappropriate behaviour I have shown on Wikipedia but I do understand that moving forward the ego and the bad faith behaviour towards other users I have shown has to go. If its okay, when I get unblocked, I would like to create a new account and retire this page in the spirit of being more productive to Wikipedia in my occasional edits. Thanks for reading. Shparhtahn (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Swarm: Do you think that, on the basis of the above statement, we can accept that Spartan will now avoid doing the same things that led to the block, so that we can lift the block? JBW (talk) 11:06, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I now see that Swarm, who placed the block, has not edited for almost a week, so it may take a long time to get a response. I have therefore decided to go ahead with unblocking, rather than waiting. JBW (talk) 21:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you JBW!

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vivaldi (TV series) 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vivaldi (TV series) 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.

Aza24 (talk) 04:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spartan. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Vivaldi (TV series), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spartan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Vivaldi".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]