2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:1D

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).

2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:1D (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

As far as I know, I have not done any jokes that are explicitly disallowed by the "Rules for Fools". Additionally, all of the jokes have been clearly marked with the April Fools tag. Finally, a different admin, Materialscientist, declined to block me here. I am not sure why I should be blocked. 2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:1D (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

April Fools is not an excuse for vandalism. – bradv🍁 01:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

---

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.

@Bradv: but how was what I was doing vandalism? In fact, Materialscientist confirmed that it was not vandalism by declining the earlier AIV report. 2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:1D (talk) 02:01, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Come on, edits like this made my day. Could the people without appreciation for this type of humour please stay away from the project space on this day, or at least not press any big buttons that will spoil the fun for the rest? – Uanfala (talk) 02:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Uanfala: Thank you @Ivanvector: do you feel this block is appropriate? 2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:1D (talk) 02:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Blanking an XfD landing page is vandalism, yes. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

TonyBallioni, it was a joke.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 03:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll only add that vandalism is narrowly defined to include only conduct deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose which this was clearly not. WP:DE perhaps, but not vandalism, looks like there was a bit of overzealousness, but I think that could have been addressed with a talk page conversation. Spectrum {{UV}} 2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D (talk) 03:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism is an accurate description of these actions, yes. Good block. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:26, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe too many at one time (April Fool's jokes seem to be limited to one guffaw and then letting it go, you gave Wikipedia a good rip roaring time but too much rip). That said, some of those were pretty creative and you seem to have a good handle on Wikipedia jargon and such, so.....why not take a user name and come play for real and give your creative side a little ride to make Wikipedia (i.e. humanity's common knowledge) better, or at least make topics you enjoy clearer and more readable to others who enjoy them too. One of us....one of us. Happy April 1st! Randy Kryn (talk) 04:19, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Or join AGFWWRUP and stay logged out-forever, much more fun. Whatever you decide to do, remember that blocks apply to you as a person even if you feel them unjust, so don't edit again, except to post to a user talk page, until it is lifted. I also recommend reading WP:GAB, writing a good-unblock request makes it more likely you will be unblocked, best of luck to you. Spectrum {{UV}} 2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D (talk) 04:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

You are correct, and my apologies to the unregistered community. Long may they roam and prosper with the winds of long-strings-of-numbers at their back. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

---