This is an archive of past discussions with User:Qwertyxp2000. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I have created a proposed addition to WP:WWIN (anyone can comment on this!)
This is what I wrote for "Wikipedia is not a tyranny". How would you comment about this? Is this reasonable for WP:WWIN? How can I improve on my analogy?
Markup
Renders as
====Wikipedia is not a tyranny===
{{further|WP:NOTYOU|WP:COI|WP:BADIDEA}}
Wikipedia is not the place to have one user with absolute control over every Wikipedian. Wikipedia is a community and all users including admins discuss with each other their ideas. Not all ideas will be agreed on, however, all ideas must not be straightforwardly disagreed on without any evidence saying why such an idea is not reasonable.
Wikipedia is not the place to have one user with absolute control over every Wikipedian. Wikipedia is a community and all users including admins discuss with each other their ideas. Not all ideas will be agreed on, however, all ideas must not be straightforwardly disagreed on without any evidence saying why such an idea is not reasonable.
Hi Qwertyxp2000: I have reverted the changes you recently made to the week 18 voting section at WT:TAFI. No offense toward you is intended. My intention is to streamline the layout, formatting and processes at the weekly voting, in hopes to encourage more participation. Excessive subsections make the page more complicated than it needs to be, in my opinion, and votes and comments are easily distinguishable in the combined Votes and comments section. Also, I feel that my efforts have significantly contributed to project participation, (Addendum: In addition to other techniques, such as notifying members on their user pages about weekly voting North America1000 09:23, 5 April 2015 (UTC)). If I'm not mistaken, last weeks voting received the most participants in the projects's history. I would like to retain the page's present formatting in hopes for this trend of significantly increased participation to continue into the future. North America100009:00, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Northamerica1000, I realised that I found it difficult to count the votes correctly. Okay, I get what you mean. Oh yes, that seems better than what I was thinking beforehand. Splitting votes in pieces. Oh yes. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 09:05, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your consideration, which is utmostly appreciated. I noted that you prefer a separate voting and comments section, stating in an edit summary that "Sorry, but segregating votes from comments is better. This is so that, when counting the votes, I do not get confused on the difference between the votes and comments". However, the page's layout is benefiting the majority of participants and editors, and I feel that going back to the old format to benefit one user carries significantly less weight. North America100009:06, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Baby i'm a firework, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 02:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
20 April: A 18-year-old boy from New Zealand joins ISIL and is reported missing.[1] New Zealand and Australia are concerned about ISIL-related terrorism at Anzac day.[2][3][4]
This user does not want to see this. You may open it for reference, esp. if you are an admin.
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).
The block is for my negative socking in AfDs and TAFI only. Yes, I was giving an illusion of extra vote power. However, I seem to not be using socking negatively elsewhere, and I admit for socking for vote power. Why did you block me for every page? I was desperate for making a useful edit, which explains my block evasion. Surely only block me from WikiProjects and AfDs? Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 8:11 am, Today (UTC+1)
Decline reason:
You don't get to selectively break the rules, I'm afraid. The very fact that you seem to think this is a legitimate line of appeal suggests to me that you really don't understand Wikipedia's policies at all; I am sorely tempted to increase this to an indefinite block until it's clear that you actually understand how things work on this site. Yunshui雲水07:35, 23 April 2015 (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.
@Yunshui: I am very VERY sorry. I am not aiming to hurt anyone. My real intention is to make a better Wikipedia, but have very bad habits of Wikipedia. Seriously, I am only a high school student and am still very naive. Don't scare me to death! Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 08:20, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
I have good faith and in the months before the incidents, I had been editing as a kind editor. Now I am an angry stubborn person due to masses of stress. Every time I edit, I edit with good faith, but it is one bad habit that spoils my reputation and that was socking. Please look at WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH and WP:AOBF. P.S. I know know how things work on the site and know the rules, but was very stupid and did socking. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg)
