Hello, I'm Mako001. I noticed that in this edit to Arlington County, Virginia, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 09:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Please explain your edit summary. What does that have to do with your edit? – Muboshgu ( talk) 22:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm TylerBurden. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Roald Dahl, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Not only adding, but apparently also repeatedly restoring once removed. TylerBurden ( talk) 02:29, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I reverted your closed of the discussion "Long Term pattern of violations of WP:CIVIL by The Rambling Man" at WP:ANI. You should not be closing any discussions at administrative noticeboards, but certainly not one as controversial as that one. Please do not do so again.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Your username (and frankly quite a bit more) is up for discussion. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names#Artificial_Nagger. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Beeblebrox (
talk)
21:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Artificial Nagger ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am asking to be unblocked, because I would like to be able to make edits again. That is the reason after all, but I suspect you would like a reason for *you* to unblock me, which is the reason for this. Frankly I’m uncertain to as why I was blocked in the first place. I was given a reason of **NOTHERE** up above. At first I noticed all the “bad” behaviors. And I went thru them one by one, and I can honestly say I’m “not guilty” of any of them. Well, maybe I’ve been **baited** by a couple of editors before. But I solved the problem by leaving the area and going on my way. Look back at the last couple of months. The majority of the edits I made were small grammar corrections. And me, of all people to be correcting grammar is hilarious. And if they weren’t grammar they were adding new sources. The majority of the subjects are almost like a history of what I’ve been seeing on TV. Or the movies since I bought a “season pass” at the theater. The only “argument” I got in wasn’t really an argument. At least not to me. It was about whether we should call, in the article, the musical group “The Chicks” as “The Chicks” throughout the article or call them by their more well known and previous name “The Dixie Chicks” when they were known as such, because it was confusing. We solved that it seems, and no one appeared to even get angry. But other than that, I can’t tell you precisely why I got blocked, even though I asked several times, even though the “you’ve been blocked” document says they have to tell you. All I got were snotty replies. So honestly, I’d like to say “I’m sorry, I won’t do X again” but I don’t know what X is. And while I was reading the NOTHERE I saw this HERE part. It has the following sections * Genuine interest and improvement — When I’m reading something and I see errors like a missing comma, it annoys me. I would call fixing that a genuine interest *at* improving. * Respect for core editing standards - They seem pretty basic and makes sense. Especially the sourcing standards. * A focus on encyclopedia building - I’ll be honest here, I don’t understand the purpose of this goal. Why else would people be making non-encyclopedia edits? * Self-correction and heeding lessons - Nobody’s perfect, least of all me. Might take me once, twice, nine times, but eventually I figure it out. Or I find a pro. So I don’t know how Beetlebrox gets off and says that I’m “Clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia” but, whatever. I don’t even care what he thinks anymore. I may not “build” this place because I don’t create articles or do any heavy labor, but according to the criteria above it’s patently obvious that I am HERE to keep this encyclopedia neat and tidy with commas in all the right places. And that should be good enough, because that’s all I’m willing to do. —-Sayonara Artificial Nagger ( talk) 19:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Confirmed block evasion via WP:LOUTSOCK. Yamla ( talk) 19:47, 4 August 2023 (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.
Artificial Nagger ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
My reason hasn’t changed from the request I made a few weeks ago above. The previous person who looked at this said I was editing logged out, which I don’t deny, but it wasn’t my intent to get around the block. I explained that I was confused about the pink block banner appearing/disappearing so I made some test edits to Yamla (above) who appears to take me at my word. In any case I haven’t edited since, and I’m quite annoyed. I see things I want to correct or add sources, etc. and I can’t because purportedly I’m “not here to build an encyclopedia”. Now I know you probably don’t give a crap I’m annoyed, but you should care that I haven’t been able to correct things or add sources, etc. because these actions are what “building an encyclopedia” needs to be built. This adds insult to injury being told I’m not here to build and encyclopedia. This is the reason I should be unblocked. I just want to go about my business and do my mostly small things. I’m not creating havoc, vandalizing or bugging anyone either. I would have asked this weeks ago, but it takes time to fill out these unblock requests. So please look at the previous block request as well, because the reasons haven’t changed.
Decline reason:
Declining as the user has never returned to reply to the discussion here as they said they would be doing soon, and this has been on hold for ample time. From my reading, there has been zero accountability from the user about what very obviously does appear to be a clear username hard block situation. The user simply claims they are innocent and don't know why they are blocked, which I don't believe is a good faith line of defense given the circumstances. There is an admin who has suggested essentially treating this as a softblock situation and this is not to say the user cannot negotiate an unblock with any individual admin. However, this would require accepting the user's claim in good faith that they literally can't see why they are blocked and this is some sort of misunderstanding. I simply cannot buy that argument on its face especially with the user being unable to even begin to talk through the fact that they are blocked over serious concerns of bad faith conduct—even if their editing has been mostly benign. This is not a situation where I would be comfortable unblocking in good faith without accountability from the user. ~Swarm~ {sting} 21:28, 30 November 2023 (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.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
Can someone please help me with this unblock request? Do I need to re-write it?
Also, it being “published” where it can be seen?
-- Artificial Nagger ( talk) 14:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mako001. I noticed that in this edit to Arlington County, Virginia, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 09:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Please explain your edit summary. What does that have to do with your edit? – Muboshgu ( talk) 22:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm TylerBurden. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Roald Dahl, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Not only adding, but apparently also repeatedly restoring once removed. TylerBurden ( talk) 02:29, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I reverted your closed of the discussion "Long Term pattern of violations of WP:CIVIL by The Rambling Man" at WP:ANI. You should not be closing any discussions at administrative noticeboards, but certainly not one as controversial as that one. Please do not do so again.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Your username (and frankly quite a bit more) is up for discussion. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names#Artificial_Nagger. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Beeblebrox (
talk)
21:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Artificial Nagger ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am asking to be unblocked, because I would like to be able to make edits again. That is the reason after all, but I suspect you would like a reason for *you* to unblock me, which is the reason for this. Frankly I’m uncertain to as why I was blocked in the first place. I was given a reason of **NOTHERE** up above. At first I noticed all the “bad” behaviors. And I went thru them one by one, and I can honestly say I’m “not guilty” of any of them. Well, maybe I’ve been **baited** by a couple of editors before. But I solved the problem by leaving the area and going on my way. Look back at the last couple of months. The majority of the edits I made were small grammar corrections. And me, of all people to be correcting grammar is hilarious. And if they weren’t grammar they were adding new sources. The majority of the subjects are almost like a history of what I’ve been seeing on TV. Or the movies since I bought a “season pass” at the theater. The only “argument” I got in wasn’t really an argument. At least not to me. It was about whether we should call, in the article, the musical group “The Chicks” as “The Chicks” throughout the article or call them by their more well known and previous name “The Dixie Chicks” when they were known as such, because it was confusing. We solved that it seems, and no one appeared to even get angry. But other than that, I can’t tell you precisely why I got blocked, even though I asked several times, even though the “you’ve been blocked” document says they have to tell you. All I got were snotty replies. So honestly, I’d like to say “I’m sorry, I won’t do X again” but I don’t know what X is. And while I was reading the NOTHERE I saw this HERE part. It has the following sections * Genuine interest and improvement — When I’m reading something and I see errors like a missing comma, it annoys me. I would call fixing that a genuine interest *at* improving. * Respect for core editing standards - They seem pretty basic and makes sense. Especially the sourcing standards. * A focus on encyclopedia building - I’ll be honest here, I don’t understand the purpose of this goal. Why else would people be making non-encyclopedia edits? * Self-correction and heeding lessons - Nobody’s perfect, least of all me. Might take me once, twice, nine times, but eventually I figure it out. Or I find a pro. So I don’t know how Beetlebrox gets off and says that I’m “Clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia” but, whatever. I don’t even care what he thinks anymore. I may not “build” this place because I don’t create articles or do any heavy labor, but according to the criteria above it’s patently obvious that I am HERE to keep this encyclopedia neat and tidy with commas in all the right places. And that should be good enough, because that’s all I’m willing to do. —-Sayonara Artificial Nagger ( talk) 19:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Confirmed block evasion via WP:LOUTSOCK. Yamla ( talk) 19:47, 4 August 2023 (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.
Artificial Nagger ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
My reason hasn’t changed from the request I made a few weeks ago above. The previous person who looked at this said I was editing logged out, which I don’t deny, but it wasn’t my intent to get around the block. I explained that I was confused about the pink block banner appearing/disappearing so I made some test edits to Yamla (above) who appears to take me at my word. In any case I haven’t edited since, and I’m quite annoyed. I see things I want to correct or add sources, etc. and I can’t because purportedly I’m “not here to build an encyclopedia”. Now I know you probably don’t give a crap I’m annoyed, but you should care that I haven’t been able to correct things or add sources, etc. because these actions are what “building an encyclopedia” needs to be built. This adds insult to injury being told I’m not here to build and encyclopedia. This is the reason I should be unblocked. I just want to go about my business and do my mostly small things. I’m not creating havoc, vandalizing or bugging anyone either. I would have asked this weeks ago, but it takes time to fill out these unblock requests. So please look at the previous block request as well, because the reasons haven’t changed.
Decline reason:
Declining as the user has never returned to reply to the discussion here as they said they would be doing soon, and this has been on hold for ample time. From my reading, there has been zero accountability from the user about what very obviously does appear to be a clear username hard block situation. The user simply claims they are innocent and don't know why they are blocked, which I don't believe is a good faith line of defense given the circumstances. There is an admin who has suggested essentially treating this as a softblock situation and this is not to say the user cannot negotiate an unblock with any individual admin. However, this would require accepting the user's claim in good faith that they literally can't see why they are blocked and this is some sort of misunderstanding. I simply cannot buy that argument on its face especially with the user being unable to even begin to talk through the fact that they are blocked over serious concerns of bad faith conduct—even if their editing has been mostly benign. This is not a situation where I would be comfortable unblocking in good faith without accountability from the user. ~Swarm~ {sting} 21:28, 30 November 2023 (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.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
Can someone please help me with this unblock request? Do I need to re-write it?
Also, it being “published” where it can be seen?
-- Artificial Nagger ( talk) 14:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC)