Hello, Michael Archangel Project, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Michael Archangel Project, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{ help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- Your first article
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dlohcierekim ( talk) 14:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Michael Archangel Project
A tag has been placed on User:Michael Archangel Project requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Dlohcierekim ( talk) 14:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below) and continue editing.
A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.
You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:
- Adding
{{ unblock-un|your new username here}}on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" on their talk page. - At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
- Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.
- Adding
{{
unblock|Your reason here}} on
your user talk page, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. 
Michael Archangel Project ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Reading through the rules on User Names, what is the reason for blocking User Name - Michael Archangel Project? It is a specific account name, with a specific intent and purpose. The name Michael Archangel is not copyrighted, nor is it a company, etc., and in no way interferes with the wikipedia page on the person Michael Archangel, as it contains the specific intent, "Project" - what else would you call it? - Hobby, Venture, etc.? If there was issue with this (as nowhere on the User names 'guidelines', does it list this "project" as a taboo name, then instead, why was I not informed, or asked, instead of a an immediate block if it was? There was no intent at impersonating a moderator, wikipage, etc. This accounts purpose is specific - a single subject, which would attempt to update multiple pages with documented and cited materials. Which specific part of the User name is unsuitable - please be specific, citing Wikipedia regulation with link to instruction thereof, which would be helpful. this account is not attempting in any way to mimic another User, or Wiki-article Michael Archangel Project ( talk) 17:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Also, your now-deleted user page suggested you were trying to promote some sort of project related to Michael Archangel.
I think it would also help in your next unblock request if you could explain what you intend to do here to help us build our encyclopedia. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:06, 28 September 2017 (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.
- Your user page was entirely inappropriate, and it's got nothing to do with sources. A Wikipedia User page is for you to tell us a little about yourself in relation to your work on the encyclopedia - it is not free web space for you to publish your own personal stuff. I think there is very little chance of your being unblocked if you do not clearly explain to us what you intend to do to help us develop our encyclopedia (I can't discern the faintest idea of that from reading your user page - it just reads like personal religious proselytising to me) and show some understanding of what Wikipedia is about. So tell us, what will you do here if unblocked? Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Michael Archangel Project ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The Username does not represent, nor intended to represent a group. Nowhere therein was stated it was a group, nor pretended to represent a group, and does not represent a group. That is a bias read into the name from your own perspective. Leave such a bias out, and do not immediately suspect. Instead, give opportunity to demonstrate the usefulness, and purposes before axing or guillotining the account. It is a singular user account (myself), with intent already specified - ie. to update multiple wiki-articles with the documented and cited materials listed. There was nothing intended to "web host". It is merely an accusation. The sources wrer clearly cited, and from book material, such as the Internet Archive, etc. The reason the sources were listed on the User page, is that Wikipedians, including Mods, have a tendency to be fearful of any large volume of verified information, and immediately delete verified and cited material, rather than work with the material and citations, to incorporate it/them (speaking from past experiences (plural)). If there was a specific source that was questioned, why not ask me about the source, instead of eliminating the whole account and the cited data? respond please, again with specific violated regulations, which so far has not been done. Presently, this is a very terrible experience with Wiki,and hope that with a more thorough investigation, the experience may be less bitter, and more beneficial to Wikipedia itself. Consider the data provided was not from any single source, nor person, nor group, and does not intend to be. It is simply a data field, cited. Request again, to unblock and allow. Michael Archangel Project ( talk) 19:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Your user page was entirely inappropriate, and it's got nothing to do with sources. A Wikipedia User page is for you to tell us a little about yourself in relation to your work on the encyclopedia - it is not free web space for you to publish your own personal stuff. I think there is very little chance of your being unblocked if you do not clearly explain to us what you intend to do to help us develop our encyclopedia (I can't discern the faintest idea of that from reading your user page - it just reads like personal religious proselytising to me) and show some understanding of what Wikipedia is about. So tell us, what will you do here if unblocked? Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
It was "entirely" inappropriate? How so? What violation of wiki regulations? Is it against Wikipedia User page regulations to post sources, yes/no? Please do not avoid this question. I am awaiting this still. What is wrong with this specific source, being listed on the User page, demonstrating the purpose of the cited material to be spread throughout various Wikipedia pages, under various sections, since it is now claimed "entirely" inappropriate. Can you demonstrate "entirely"? Evidence of inappropriateness? So far, Zero. I am simply asking for unbiased Moderation here. Even a vote of 13 Mods if necessary - do I need to take this to the main Wiki board?, I would ask for those who would vote, be none of whom already attempted to block this page, or commented on it.
Do you still need yet more details, and sound reasons?
For instance, a link and cited source - to present topic -, was given as:
early Christian:
Michael Archangel Project ( talk) 20:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Melito of Sardis (wrote AD 165 – AD 175, died c. AD 180) [1]
Decline reason:
This clearly is related to Special:Contributions/172.56.1.90, and it is an attempt to give undue weight to specific beliefs about Michael that are already covered in our article about him, based on better sources than the ones that were listed on your user page. (For example, the source you highlight here doesn't even mention Michael and thus is entirely useless for the purpose you intend to put it to.) Your edits were anything but neutral but rather promoted a specific point of view. I don't see that unblocking you would improve the encyclopedia. Huon ( talk) 02:25, 29 September 2017 (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.
- As you are showing no sign that you are actually here to help us build an encyclopedia, I have revoked your ability to edit this talk page and so prevent any further waste of time. Another admin will review your latest unblock request and is free to reinstate talk page access if they see fit. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 20:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ Cureton's Spicilegium Syriacum, containing remains of Bardeson, Meliton, Ambrose and Mara Bar Serapion. Now first edited, with an English translation and notes, by the Rev. William Cureton, M.A. F.R.S. Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen, Rector of St. Margaret's, and Canon of Westminster. London: Francis and John Rivington, St. Paul's Churchyard and Waterloo Place. 1855., pages 53-54 - https://archive.org/stream/spicilegiumsyria00cureuoft#page/53/mode/1up https://archive.org/stream/spicilegiumsyria00cureuoft#page/54/mode/1up
Hello, Michael Archangel Project, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Michael Archangel Project, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{ help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- Your first article
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Biographies of living persons
- How to write a great article
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Help pages
- Tutorial
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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dlohcierekim ( talk) 14:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Michael Archangel Project
A tag has been placed on User:Michael Archangel Project requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Dlohcierekim ( talk) 14:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below) and continue editing.
A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.
You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:
- Adding
{{ unblock-un|your new username here}}on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" on their talk page. - At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
- Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.
- Adding
{{
unblock|Your reason here}} on
your user talk page, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. Michael Archangel Project ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Reading through the rules on User Names, what is the reason for blocking User Name - Michael Archangel Project? It is a specific account name, with a specific intent and purpose. The name Michael Archangel is not copyrighted, nor is it a company, etc., and in no way interferes with the wikipedia page on the person Michael Archangel, as it contains the specific intent, "Project" - what else would you call it? - Hobby, Venture, etc.? If there was issue with this (as nowhere on the User names 'guidelines', does it list this "project" as a taboo name, then instead, why was I not informed, or asked, instead of a an immediate block if it was? There was no intent at impersonating a moderator, wikipage, etc. This accounts purpose is specific - a single subject, which would attempt to update multiple pages with documented and cited materials. Which specific part of the User name is unsuitable - please be specific, citing Wikipedia regulation with link to instruction thereof, which would be helpful. this account is not attempting in any way to mimic another User, or Wiki-article Michael Archangel Project ( talk) 17:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Also, your now-deleted user page suggested you were trying to promote some sort of project related to Michael Archangel.
I think it would also help in your next unblock request if you could explain what you intend to do here to help us build our encyclopedia. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:06, 28 September 2017 (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.
- Your user page was entirely inappropriate, and it's got nothing to do with sources. A Wikipedia User page is for you to tell us a little about yourself in relation to your work on the encyclopedia - it is not free web space for you to publish your own personal stuff. I think there is very little chance of your being unblocked if you do not clearly explain to us what you intend to do to help us develop our encyclopedia (I can't discern the faintest idea of that from reading your user page - it just reads like personal religious proselytising to me) and show some understanding of what Wikipedia is about. So tell us, what will you do here if unblocked? Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Michael Archangel Project ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The Username does not represent, nor intended to represent a group. Nowhere therein was stated it was a group, nor pretended to represent a group, and does not represent a group. That is a bias read into the name from your own perspective. Leave such a bias out, and do not immediately suspect. Instead, give opportunity to demonstrate the usefulness, and purposes before axing or guillotining the account. It is a singular user account (myself), with intent already specified - ie. to update multiple wiki-articles with the documented and cited materials listed. There was nothing intended to "web host". It is merely an accusation. The sources wrer clearly cited, and from book material, such as the Internet Archive, etc. The reason the sources were listed on the User page, is that Wikipedians, including Mods, have a tendency to be fearful of any large volume of verified information, and immediately delete verified and cited material, rather than work with the material and citations, to incorporate it/them (speaking from past experiences (plural)). If there was a specific source that was questioned, why not ask me about the source, instead of eliminating the whole account and the cited data? respond please, again with specific violated regulations, which so far has not been done. Presently, this is a very terrible experience with Wiki,and hope that with a more thorough investigation, the experience may be less bitter, and more beneficial to Wikipedia itself. Consider the data provided was not from any single source, nor person, nor group, and does not intend to be. It is simply a data field, cited. Request again, to unblock and allow. Michael Archangel Project ( talk) 19:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Your user page was entirely inappropriate, and it's got nothing to do with sources. A Wikipedia User page is for you to tell us a little about yourself in relation to your work on the encyclopedia - it is not free web space for you to publish your own personal stuff. I think there is very little chance of your being unblocked if you do not clearly explain to us what you intend to do to help us develop our encyclopedia (I can't discern the faintest idea of that from reading your user page - it just reads like personal religious proselytising to me) and show some understanding of what Wikipedia is about. So tell us, what will you do here if unblocked? Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 19:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
It was "entirely" inappropriate? How so? What violation of wiki regulations? Is it against Wikipedia User page regulations to post sources, yes/no? Please do not avoid this question. I am awaiting this still. What is wrong with this specific source, being listed on the User page, demonstrating the purpose of the cited material to be spread throughout various Wikipedia pages, under various sections, since it is now claimed "entirely" inappropriate. Can you demonstrate "entirely"? Evidence of inappropriateness? So far, Zero. I am simply asking for unbiased Moderation here. Even a vote of 13 Mods if necessary - do I need to take this to the main Wiki board?, I would ask for those who would vote, be none of whom already attempted to block this page, or commented on it.
Do you still need yet more details, and sound reasons?
For instance, a link and cited source - to present topic -, was given as:
early Christian:
Michael Archangel Project ( talk) 20:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Melito of Sardis (wrote AD 165 – AD 175, died c. AD 180) [1]
Decline reason:
This clearly is related to Special:Contributions/172.56.1.90, and it is an attempt to give undue weight to specific beliefs about Michael that are already covered in our article about him, based on better sources than the ones that were listed on your user page. (For example, the source you highlight here doesn't even mention Michael and thus is entirely useless for the purpose you intend to put it to.) Your edits were anything but neutral but rather promoted a specific point of view. I don't see that unblocking you would improve the encyclopedia. Huon ( talk) 02:25, 29 September 2017 (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.
- As you are showing no sign that you are actually here to help us build an encyclopedia, I have revoked your ability to edit this talk page and so prevent any further waste of time. Another admin will review your latest unblock request and is free to reinstate talk page access if they see fit. Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 20:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ Cureton's Spicilegium Syriacum, containing remains of Bardeson, Meliton, Ambrose and Mara Bar Serapion. Now first edited, with an English translation and notes, by the Rev. William Cureton, M.A. F.R.S. Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen, Rector of St. Margaret's, and Canon of Westminster. London: Francis and John Rivington, St. Paul's Churchyard and Waterloo Place. 1855., pages 53-54 - https://archive.org/stream/spicilegiumsyria00cureuoft#page/53/mode/1up https://archive.org/stream/spicilegiumsyria00cureuoft#page/54/mode/1up