Shulinjiang

Vandalism and sock puppetry

please read wikipedia guidlines on WP:Sock and Wp:Vandal before continuing your disruptive edits on the Kamov and CAIC Z-10 pages. you have used multiple ip's "198.135.125.90" , "198.135.125.85" besides this account to make edits to the pages in the attempt to make it look like multiple editors were editing the pages which constitutes an act of sock puppetry. removing sourced content and leaving inline biased comments constitutes an act of vandalism. both of these are ban-able offenses and if you continue to do so you will be reported and banned. The one of the links you keep adding to both of these articles is a bulletin board and is not a reliable source according to Wp:RS and neither of the sources are not "official" as you claim. furthermore BOTH of the sources you seem to cite do not agree with what you are claiming at all. they only mention that the subsequent design work was done in china and that the original design work was done by kamov, which has already been established in the articles. failure to understand the rules and continuing your acts of vandalism and sockpuppetry will result in you being banned. you have been warned. Pvpoodle (talk) 18:57, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kamov. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2001 Bangladeshi-Indian border skirmish. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at CAIC Z-10. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvpoodle (talk • contribs) 19:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shulinjiang, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Pvpoodle (talk) 22:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  PhilKnight (talk) 06:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikistalking

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvpoodle (talk • contribs) 17:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for for abusing multiple anonymous accounts (IPs) to spread you point of view and continue your edit war. You have also personally attacked another editor who tried to discuss the matter with you, so it has become clear that you are not here to improve Wikipedia.. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  De728631 (talk) 18:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)