Welcome!
Hello, Bcmh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
TomStar81 (
Talk)
23:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Just to make you aware, you have broken WP:3RR at Next Singaporean general election. Please could you revert your most recent edit and restore the previous text, or you will be reported and most likely blocked. Cheers, Number 5 7 14:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Dreamy Jazz
talk to me |
my contributions
00:49, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
– robertsky ( talk) 08:50, 27 November 2022 (UTC)As you've ignored multiple requests to stop, you have been reported. Number 5 7 16:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Daniel Case (
talk)
22:04, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
understood the block for edit warring on Next Singaporean general election, appreciate and will use the suggestions provided for page protection and dispute resolution instead of edit warring, keen to continue making useful contributions as shown in user contributions page and now understands the purpose of consensus through the five pillars Bcmh ( talk) 02:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
This block is for edit warring; I think that based on this request that will not recur, so I am removing the block. If anyone has other grievances with this user's behavior, WP:ANI is now the proper forum- though my suggestion would be to not run there immediately. 331dot ( talk) 09:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
President of Singapore, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been
reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your
sandbox for that. Thank you.
Lightoil (
talk)
08:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
331dot (
talk)
21:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC){{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
18:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Understood the block for edit warring on President of Singapore. The most recent revert I made on President of Singapore where I neglected to include an edit summary, was for the same reason as those with edit summaries that I made before (that the user known as Dawkin Verbier did not get consensus for their substantial edits to the lead section and was engaging in sockpuppetry with unregistered accounts). As learnt from previous events, I did request page protection for President of Singapore but was initially turned down. Hoping that this block will be reviewed favourably so that I can use the dispute resolution and relevant administrator notice boards for the events regarding Dawkin Verbier and President of Singapore, and to state my position on the lead section of the President of Singapore article in its talk page. Thank you for reviewing this block Bcmh ( talk) 04:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I see far too many blocks in the last few months to consider such an early unblock request. Consider waiting six months, per the standard offer. Girth Summit (blether) 16:30, 14 February 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.
Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
To return to my original purpose of making useful contributions in areas that I am able to, such as adding newly sourced information and editing existing content for the purpose of clarity and conveyance of meaning, which I have had a history of doing; with the recognition that previous hot-headed actions were caused by impatience for instant gratification in correcting others, I will use talk pages as the first area to raise opinions or concerns with justification and the aim of seeking consensus, and then propose a remedy first before taking other action like dispute resolution if needed; not able to promise perfection but will try with more restraint than before, thank you for reading this message. Bcmh ( talk) 05:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This does not convince me. I don't really see a path forward for you without a WP:0RR restriction and likely, as Number 57 says below, without a WP:TOPICBAN on all politics-related articles. Other admins may feel differently. Yamla ( talk) 11:32, 19 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.
Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
not sure if this is the correct method to clarify but the response by the user known as Number 57 in my previous unblock request makes reference to my recognition that my former actions in wanting to correct others provides sufficient reason to oppose the unblock request; however, I would like to clarify that my intention was to convey that I recognised the undesirability of my previous behaviour and that I do not intend to continue such behaviour; I would not be requesting an unblock if I wanted to repeat the same behaviour that is wrong and got me blocked in the first place; hoping that the reviewing administrator known as Yamla and/or another administrator can see that the interpretation conveyed by Number 57 was not at all what I intended to convey, just to be clear, I re-write and re-state my previous unblock request with clearer phrasing here: "To return to my original purpose of making useful contributions in areas that I am able to, such as adding newly sourced information and editing existing content for the purpose of clarity and conveyance of meaning, which I have had a history of doing; with the recognition that my previous hot-headed actions six plus months ago were caused by my impatience for instant gratification in correcting others that I recognise is wrong and will not repeat, I will use talk pages as the first area to raise opinions or concerns with justification and the aim of seeking consensus, and then propose a remedy first before taking other action like dispute resolution if needed; not able to promise perfection but will try with more restraint than before, thank you for reading this message". Also, for clarity, my intention in re-posting this unblock request is to clarify any possible misinterpretation of my previous request which was not phrased in the best of terms. Thank you Bcmh ( talk) 12:35, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The user says below that they "want to return to making useful contributions to the subject areas that I have been active in prior to the block". I do not think this is a good idea, and if unblocked I would suggest that they be restricted from editing in the topic areas that caused the negative behaviour. Also, the unblock requests do not go into enough detail to explain why the edits that led to the block were wrong. More specific information will be needed for an unblock request to be successful. Z1720 ( talk) 20:23, 21 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.
Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
With the understanding that this block was due to my undesirable edit warring behaviour in the President of Singapore article with the user known as Dawkin Verbier in particular and, my pattern of past and cumulative edit warring behaviour in general, I hereby appeal for this block to be lifted because:
Thank you for reading and considering this request Bcmh ( talk) 10:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
With your acceptance of the restrictions indicated, I will remove the block. I logged these restrictions. You may appeal them after six months. 331dot ( talk) 23:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
This is going to require- at a minimum- you agreeing to a topic ban from articles related to current politics, as well as an 0RR restriction. 331dot ( talk) 10:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
@ 331dot: I agree to the ban and restriction Bcmh ( talk) 17:48, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Disruptive editing, sockpuppetry, and uncivility by User:Sgweirdo. Thank you.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
18:23, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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)
00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Bcmh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
TomStar81 (
Talk)
23:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Just to make you aware, you have broken WP:3RR at Next Singaporean general election. Please could you revert your most recent edit and restore the previous text, or you will be reported and most likely blocked. Cheers, Number 5 7 14:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Dreamy Jazz
talk to me |
my contributions
00:49, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
– robertsky ( talk) 08:50, 27 November 2022 (UTC)As you've ignored multiple requests to stop, you have been reported. Number 5 7 16:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Daniel Case (
talk)
22:04, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
understood the block for edit warring on Next Singaporean general election, appreciate and will use the suggestions provided for page protection and dispute resolution instead of edit warring, keen to continue making useful contributions as shown in user contributions page and now understands the purpose of consensus through the five pillars Bcmh ( talk) 02:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
This block is for edit warring; I think that based on this request that will not recur, so I am removing the block. If anyone has other grievances with this user's behavior, WP:ANI is now the proper forum- though my suggestion would be to not run there immediately. 331dot ( talk) 09:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
President of Singapore, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been
reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your
sandbox for that. Thank you.
Lightoil (
talk)
08:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
331dot (
talk)
21:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC){{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
18:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Understood the block for edit warring on President of Singapore. The most recent revert I made on President of Singapore where I neglected to include an edit summary, was for the same reason as those with edit summaries that I made before (that the user known as Dawkin Verbier did not get consensus for their substantial edits to the lead section and was engaging in sockpuppetry with unregistered accounts). As learnt from previous events, I did request page protection for President of Singapore but was initially turned down. Hoping that this block will be reviewed favourably so that I can use the dispute resolution and relevant administrator notice boards for the events regarding Dawkin Verbier and President of Singapore, and to state my position on the lead section of the President of Singapore article in its talk page. Thank you for reviewing this block Bcmh ( talk) 04:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I see far too many blocks in the last few months to consider such an early unblock request. Consider waiting six months, per the standard offer. Girth Summit (blether) 16:30, 14 February 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.
Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
To return to my original purpose of making useful contributions in areas that I am able to, such as adding newly sourced information and editing existing content for the purpose of clarity and conveyance of meaning, which I have had a history of doing; with the recognition that previous hot-headed actions were caused by impatience for instant gratification in correcting others, I will use talk pages as the first area to raise opinions or concerns with justification and the aim of seeking consensus, and then propose a remedy first before taking other action like dispute resolution if needed; not able to promise perfection but will try with more restraint than before, thank you for reading this message. Bcmh ( talk) 05:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This does not convince me. I don't really see a path forward for you without a WP:0RR restriction and likely, as Number 57 says below, without a WP:TOPICBAN on all politics-related articles. Other admins may feel differently. Yamla ( talk) 11:32, 19 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.
Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
not sure if this is the correct method to clarify but the response by the user known as Number 57 in my previous unblock request makes reference to my recognition that my former actions in wanting to correct others provides sufficient reason to oppose the unblock request; however, I would like to clarify that my intention was to convey that I recognised the undesirability of my previous behaviour and that I do not intend to continue such behaviour; I would not be requesting an unblock if I wanted to repeat the same behaviour that is wrong and got me blocked in the first place; hoping that the reviewing administrator known as Yamla and/or another administrator can see that the interpretation conveyed by Number 57 was not at all what I intended to convey, just to be clear, I re-write and re-state my previous unblock request with clearer phrasing here: "To return to my original purpose of making useful contributions in areas that I am able to, such as adding newly sourced information and editing existing content for the purpose of clarity and conveyance of meaning, which I have had a history of doing; with the recognition that my previous hot-headed actions six plus months ago were caused by my impatience for instant gratification in correcting others that I recognise is wrong and will not repeat, I will use talk pages as the first area to raise opinions or concerns with justification and the aim of seeking consensus, and then propose a remedy first before taking other action like dispute resolution if needed; not able to promise perfection but will try with more restraint than before, thank you for reading this message". Also, for clarity, my intention in re-posting this unblock request is to clarify any possible misinterpretation of my previous request which was not phrased in the best of terms. Thank you Bcmh ( talk) 12:35, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The user says below that they "want to return to making useful contributions to the subject areas that I have been active in prior to the block". I do not think this is a good idea, and if unblocked I would suggest that they be restricted from editing in the topic areas that caused the negative behaviour. Also, the unblock requests do not go into enough detail to explain why the edits that led to the block were wrong. More specific information will be needed for an unblock request to be successful. Z1720 ( talk) 20:23, 21 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.
Bcmh ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
With the understanding that this block was due to my undesirable edit warring behaviour in the President of Singapore article with the user known as Dawkin Verbier in particular and, my pattern of past and cumulative edit warring behaviour in general, I hereby appeal for this block to be lifted because:
Thank you for reading and considering this request Bcmh ( talk) 10:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
With your acceptance of the restrictions indicated, I will remove the block. I logged these restrictions. You may appeal them after six months. 331dot ( talk) 23:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
This is going to require- at a minimum- you agreeing to a topic ban from articles related to current politics, as well as an 0RR restriction. 331dot ( talk) 10:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
@ 331dot: I agree to the ban and restriction Bcmh ( talk) 17:48, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Disruptive editing, sockpuppetry, and uncivility by User:Sgweirdo. Thank you.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
18:23, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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)
00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)