|
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:41, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:14, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:32, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
i'm being attacked for absolutely no reason, this person ohnoitsjamie doesnt respond to my question for a month then retaliates
Decline reason:
I see no attack. The link goes straight to an affiliate link / ticket selling site. Not clear on how it is useful and there's a clear COI here. For this kind of material, it would be best to just send people to the LiveNation site since they're the actual operator and first party. Unfortunately, you chose to re-add the link several times to different pages using different IPs, so a blacklisting seems appropriate. Since your only intent seems to be promoting this site and the associated facebook site there is no reason to unblock this account. We are here to improve articles, not to promote our own material. Kuru (talk) 00:33, 24 April 2022 (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.
Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
are you sure you read everything - i politely asked on March 24 if adding it would be ok and she failed to respond, now i'm blocked because of her failure to respond? I don't always remember to log in, I work on the road so that's why multiple ip - not sure why that is such a huge deal, I'm not perfect. My only intent is definitely not to promote that site, that is false as well - I have added 2 great history photos, if you check they are still there and I don't intend on ever trying to add that link again - she is also retaliating by trying to blacklist the link for no good reason. It is NOT just an affiliate link / ticket selling site, it's an independent guide with weather, history, event info, parking info, directions and alot more.. I have 40 years of great knowledge about Jones Beach and plan on adding useful info, not links. thanks
Decline reason:
You aren't owed a response. You were told your link was inappropriate. That was true on March 7. It's still true today. The link wasn't blacklisted out of retaliation, it was blacklisted because it's not an appropriate site to link here. That's not to say your site is a bad site, just that it's not appropriate here. Yamla ( talk) 11:26, 24 April 2022 (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.
Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
wow I'm not "owed" a response? and I'm supposed to know that?? really? usually when someone asks a polite question a normal polite person responds - again i politely asked on March 24 if adding it would be ok and she failed to respond, now i'm blocked because of her failure to respond? I'M NOT A WIKIPEDIA EXPERT.. I don't always remember to log in, I work on the road so that's why multiple ip - not sure why that is such a huge deal I'm not perfect. My only intent is definitely not to promote that site, that is false as well - I HAVE RECENTLY ADDED 2 GREAT HISTORY PHOTOS, if you check they are STILL there and I don't intend on ever trying to add that link again - she is also retaliating by trying to blacklist the link for no good reason. It is NOT just an affiliate link / ticket selling site, it's an independent guide with weather, history, event info, parking info, directions and alot more which WAS useful on wikipedia for almost 20 years.. I have 40 years of great knowledge about Jones Beach and plan on adding useful info, not links.. unfortunately IF i'm not unblocked all future useful edits will have to be done not logged in.
Decline reason:
"I don't always remember to log in, I work on the road so that's why multiple ip - not sure why that is such a huge deal I'm not perfect." If after all this time you're still "not sure why that is such a huge deal" then ... well ... I don't know what purpose any of these conversations can possibly serve. Many other editors, even highly problematic ones, get and have gotten this. It is a huge deal because if we didn't take it that way, bad actors would be exploiting it. Your level of indifference to this makes it highly doubtful, to me, that you will ever be unblocked.
"unfortunately IF i'm not unblocked all future useful edits will have to be done not logged in." For this alone I could have declined. Promising to sockpuppet and evade further if you're not unblocked is never the way to get unblocked. And thus I think it not only enough that I decline this request but that I revoke your talk page access as any further requests would be a waste of our time and yours (you may still continue to bang your head against this particular wall by using the private Unblock Ticket Request System) — Daniel Case ( talk) 05:30, 25 April 2022 (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.
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Daniel Case ( talk) 05:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:11, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
After discussion with blocking admin, unblocking. User agrees to, not add links to Jones Beach, and any related topic, eg, Jones Beach State Park and Jones Beach Theater. (jonesbeach.com, etc), and to not edit Jones Beach, and any related topic, eg, Jones Beach State Park and Jones Beach Theater. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Unblocked. Welcome back. Logged in unblock log. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Lia Thomas. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 02:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Since the unblock, you have made precisely one (1) constructive edit to an article, a whole bunch of grossly inappropriate ones to Talk pages and one edit to an article (a BLP!) that was nothing but an unreferenced and abusive rant. Intentionally or otherwise, the disruption you are causing greatly outweighs any good you are doing here. It is shocking to see such bad behaviour from somebody who was generously granted an unblock. If I was an admin I'd reblock you right now. I'm not an admin (and that's probably for the best). You have one last chance to contribute constructively. Please take it. DanielRigal ( talk) 21:08, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Please follow WP:BRD. The changes you want to make are against a long-standing version of the lead. It's okay to make a change, but once it's reverted, you must discuss. Please don't edit war. Wes sideman ( talk) 14:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Klete Keller. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Wes sideman ( talk) 12:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
You have been edit warring and making personal attacks. If you continue, you may be blocked without further warning. Discussing does not mean brawling and then editing as you wish without agreement from other editors. Please see WP:DR. I have been asked as unblocking admin if I feel your actions merit reblocking. As I see a user talk page full of contentiousness and unwillingness to collaborate, I have no objection to reblocking you now. Courtesy ping @ Ohnoitsjamie:. I will also consider a s Discretionary Sanctions warning. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 17:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
tedder (
talk)
06:59, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
there is no edit war, check the talk page on Klete Keller, my edit has been accepted for good reason: From my point of view, there is truth in what you are both saying. If he weren't an Olympian, he'd be just another member of the mob on J6. But the fact that he is "the Olympian that participated in J6" is, and likely will forever be, be the best-known thing about him. Not anything else. Not what event he won his medal for, or what his best-times were. I'd liken it to John du Pont. His primary notability is derived from the prominence/wealth he was born into as a member of the du Pont family, and his involvement in USA Wrestling. If he had murdered two random, people with using same means under most other circumstances, it might be another 9:00 news story without extrodinary noteworthiness. But he forever will be best known as "that du Pont family wrestling sponsor that murdered those wrestlers" ::This being said, as far as the lead sentence, it seems pretty clear to me that it should mention that he is a swimmer first, then that he committed a crime. SecretName101 ( talk) 07:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This doesn't address the problems with your edits. WP:GAB explains how to craft an appropriate unblock request. Yamla ( talk) 11:13, 13 November 2022 (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.
Just to chime in here, whether or not the edit was a good edit doesn’t negate edit warring behavior. If there was a disagreement that could not be reconciled in the talk page, my understanding is that the best course of action would be to go elsewhere on Wikipedia to request other parties chime in instead of edit warring over a matter. To be unblocked, I think the user should demonstrate understanding of edit warring as an issue and a willingness not to participate in it, rather than just saying that it was justified because someone else later agreed with their edit. SecretName101 ( talk) 09:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 21:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
|
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:41, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:14, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:32, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
i'm being attacked for absolutely no reason, this person ohnoitsjamie doesnt respond to my question for a month then retaliates
Decline reason:
I see no attack. The link goes straight to an affiliate link / ticket selling site. Not clear on how it is useful and there's a clear COI here. For this kind of material, it would be best to just send people to the LiveNation site since they're the actual operator and first party. Unfortunately, you chose to re-add the link several times to different pages using different IPs, so a blacklisting seems appropriate. Since your only intent seems to be promoting this site and the associated facebook site there is no reason to unblock this account. We are here to improve articles, not to promote our own material. Kuru (talk) 00:33, 24 April 2022 (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.
Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
are you sure you read everything - i politely asked on March 24 if adding it would be ok and she failed to respond, now i'm blocked because of her failure to respond? I don't always remember to log in, I work on the road so that's why multiple ip - not sure why that is such a huge deal, I'm not perfect. My only intent is definitely not to promote that site, that is false as well - I have added 2 great history photos, if you check they are still there and I don't intend on ever trying to add that link again - she is also retaliating by trying to blacklist the link for no good reason. It is NOT just an affiliate link / ticket selling site, it's an independent guide with weather, history, event info, parking info, directions and alot more.. I have 40 years of great knowledge about Jones Beach and plan on adding useful info, not links. thanks
Decline reason:
You aren't owed a response. You were told your link was inappropriate. That was true on March 7. It's still true today. The link wasn't blacklisted out of retaliation, it was blacklisted because it's not an appropriate site to link here. That's not to say your site is a bad site, just that it's not appropriate here. Yamla ( talk) 11:26, 24 April 2022 (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.
Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
wow I'm not "owed" a response? and I'm supposed to know that?? really? usually when someone asks a polite question a normal polite person responds - again i politely asked on March 24 if adding it would be ok and she failed to respond, now i'm blocked because of her failure to respond? I'M NOT A WIKIPEDIA EXPERT.. I don't always remember to log in, I work on the road so that's why multiple ip - not sure why that is such a huge deal I'm not perfect. My only intent is definitely not to promote that site, that is false as well - I HAVE RECENTLY ADDED 2 GREAT HISTORY PHOTOS, if you check they are STILL there and I don't intend on ever trying to add that link again - she is also retaliating by trying to blacklist the link for no good reason. It is NOT just an affiliate link / ticket selling site, it's an independent guide with weather, history, event info, parking info, directions and alot more which WAS useful on wikipedia for almost 20 years.. I have 40 years of great knowledge about Jones Beach and plan on adding useful info, not links.. unfortunately IF i'm not unblocked all future useful edits will have to be done not logged in.
Decline reason:
"I don't always remember to log in, I work on the road so that's why multiple ip - not sure why that is such a huge deal I'm not perfect." If after all this time you're still "not sure why that is such a huge deal" then ... well ... I don't know what purpose any of these conversations can possibly serve. Many other editors, even highly problematic ones, get and have gotten this. It is a huge deal because if we didn't take it that way, bad actors would be exploiting it. Your level of indifference to this makes it highly doubtful, to me, that you will ever be unblocked.
"unfortunately IF i'm not unblocked all future useful edits will have to be done not logged in." For this alone I could have declined. Promising to sockpuppet and evade further if you're not unblocked is never the way to get unblocked. And thus I think it not only enough that I decline this request but that I revoke your talk page access as any further requests would be a waste of our time and yours (you may still continue to bang your head against this particular wall by using the private Unblock Ticket Request System) — Daniel Case ( talk) 05:30, 25 April 2022 (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.
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Daniel Case ( talk) 05:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:11, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
After discussion with blocking admin, unblocking. User agrees to, not add links to Jones Beach, and any related topic, eg, Jones Beach State Park and Jones Beach Theater. (jonesbeach.com, etc), and to not edit Jones Beach, and any related topic, eg, Jones Beach State Park and Jones Beach Theater. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Unblocked. Welcome back. Logged in unblock log. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Lia Thomas. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 02:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Since the unblock, you have made precisely one (1) constructive edit to an article, a whole bunch of grossly inappropriate ones to Talk pages and one edit to an article (a BLP!) that was nothing but an unreferenced and abusive rant. Intentionally or otherwise, the disruption you are causing greatly outweighs any good you are doing here. It is shocking to see such bad behaviour from somebody who was generously granted an unblock. If I was an admin I'd reblock you right now. I'm not an admin (and that's probably for the best). You have one last chance to contribute constructively. Please take it. DanielRigal ( talk) 21:08, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Please follow WP:BRD. The changes you want to make are against a long-standing version of the lead. It's okay to make a change, but once it's reverted, you must discuss. Please don't edit war. Wes sideman ( talk) 14:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Klete Keller. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Wes sideman ( talk) 12:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
You have been edit warring and making personal attacks. If you continue, you may be blocked without further warning. Discussing does not mean brawling and then editing as you wish without agreement from other editors. Please see WP:DR. I have been asked as unblocking admin if I feel your actions merit reblocking. As I see a user talk page full of contentiousness and unwillingness to collaborate, I have no objection to reblocking you now. Courtesy ping @ Ohnoitsjamie:. I will also consider a s Discretionary Sanctions warning. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 17:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
tedder (
talk)
06:59, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Defeedme ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
there is no edit war, check the talk page on Klete Keller, my edit has been accepted for good reason: From my point of view, there is truth in what you are both saying. If he weren't an Olympian, he'd be just another member of the mob on J6. But the fact that he is "the Olympian that participated in J6" is, and likely will forever be, be the best-known thing about him. Not anything else. Not what event he won his medal for, or what his best-times were. I'd liken it to John du Pont. His primary notability is derived from the prominence/wealth he was born into as a member of the du Pont family, and his involvement in USA Wrestling. If he had murdered two random, people with using same means under most other circumstances, it might be another 9:00 news story without extrodinary noteworthiness. But he forever will be best known as "that du Pont family wrestling sponsor that murdered those wrestlers" ::This being said, as far as the lead sentence, it seems pretty clear to me that it should mention that he is a swimmer first, then that he committed a crime. SecretName101 ( talk) 07:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This doesn't address the problems with your edits. WP:GAB explains how to craft an appropriate unblock request. Yamla ( talk) 11:13, 13 November 2022 (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.
Just to chime in here, whether or not the edit was a good edit doesn’t negate edit warring behavior. If there was a disagreement that could not be reconciled in the talk page, my understanding is that the best course of action would be to go elsewhere on Wikipedia to request other parties chime in instead of edit warring over a matter. To be unblocked, I think the user should demonstrate understanding of edit warring as an issue and a willingness not to participate in it, rather than just saying that it was justified because someone else later agreed with their edit. SecretName101 ( talk) 09:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 21:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)