User talk:Madcricketer

I was given no warning of a block, let alone an indefinite one. This is contrary to "Disruptive editing may result in warnings and then escalating blocks, typically starting with 24 hours," from [1].

Endorsing block, for all the many reasons you have already been warned about. You need to go back through and address each of those problems, telling us what you did wrong and what you would do right instead. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:25, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was given no warning of a block, let alone an indefinite one. This is contrary to "Disruptive editing may result in warnings and then escalating blocks, typically starting with 24 hours," from [2].

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 05:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was given no warning of a block, let alone an indefinite one. This is contrary to "Disruptive editing may result in warnings and then escalating blocks, typically starting with 24 hours," from [3].

You were given several warnings on this page, which you removed; doing so is considered an acknowledgement that you read them. In any event, there is no requirement for a certain number of warnings, or any warnings at all if it is deemed necessary; the wording you cite states "typically". If you continue to focus on this and not the actual reason for the block, you will lose access to this page too. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 12:30, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]