User talk:Latchem

Archives

1

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Birohar, Latchem.

Unfortunately Kudpung has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

You do not appear to have left a message for the creator.

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

August 2016

Hello Latchem. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. KGirlTrucker81^talk what I'm been doing 02:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IP address block exemption

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Latchem (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Requesting an IP address block exemption. When I try to edit, I am unable to do so because of a "range block" affecting IP addresses 2607:FEA8:A260:4BE:0:0:0:0/64. The block expires in a month. I understand that this block is in place because "this IP address or network has been used [...] to disrupt Wikipedia." You can review my contributions. I am clearly not here to disrupt Wikipedia. I spend my time helping out reviewing new pages and recent changes. I often use public networks on Wifi with my laptop and sometimes I find it inconvenient when there are blocks in place. As for this specific IP address, this is at home - I live in an apartment-style complex where the landlord provides utilities (including Internet) and there are multiple tenants who use this "range" of IP addresses on this general network. Therefore, I respectfully ask for an IP address block exemption. Thanks, —Latchem 15:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; now blocked directly. Yamla (talk) 18:25, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

---

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.

Ping @DoRD: as the blocking admin on this checkuser block. --Yamla (talk) 16:50, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On further review, I've decided to block Latchem as well. Latchem, you may appeal to ArbCom or WP:UTRS. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:47, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I endorse this block because although the user replied with the pompous response: @Kudpung, thanks for your message. I understand the policies and guidelines well enough - I do not require a process to go through. And I intend on continuing what I've been doing as there really haven't been any problems. Feel free to review my contributions. Thanks, they persisted and were warned again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:35, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]