|
User talk:TylerKutschbachWelcome
Thank youJust wanted to thank you for all the census updates you’ve done. It’s an under appreciated job, but an important one! Grey Wanderer (talk) 18:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC) CitationsThanks for the census update, but please use the same style of citation that was already present in the article. You can automatically harmonize whitespace in citations using this script. SounderBruce 03:35, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Please stopPlease stop adding data for the VILLAGE of Mamaroneck to the article for the TOWN of Mamaroneck. Thanks ɱ (talk) 17:35, 6 August 2019 (UTC) Stop deleting paramatersPlease stop deleting infobox parameters on the page Lexington, SC. There is a place for census data for both the 2010 official data and the 2018 estimation. Stop deleting relevant content. Any further edits will be considered vandalism (Nicholemacgregor (talk) 22:03, 11 August 2019 (UTC)). Do not put the 2018 numbers into the infbox unless you have the correct erefernce to support them. The one you're putting in goes to a 404 page. No reference, no numbers. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:48, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
Noticeboard thread about your edits
Using specific references for census estimate dataIn this edit, after issues raised by other editors, you used a source that provides a specific number for the municipality in question. Yet in this edit, you return to the status quo ante of adding a generic source that points to data sets across the nation. Why not use more specific -- either city level or state level -- for each article, rather than merely pointing to a page that has no direct access to the data? The concerns raised by other editors regarding the source backing up the specific census estimate is legitimate. This page from the Census Bureau has tables for each state that shows the exact data for each municipality. Why not use these in your sources? Alansohn (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC) At Morgan County, Ohio, you reverted my edit and added that Morgan County "is a stronghold Republican county". What is a "stronghold"? What is your source to support that this county is a "stronghold"? You also wrote "Democrats have only won the county two times total in presidential elections, all in years where the party won nationally by a landslide". What's a "landslide"? What is your source to support this? When you revert another editor, please leave an edit summary to explain why. Also, please do not add unsourced editorials. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:58, 11 October 2019 (UTC) Edit warring on behalf of your IP edits
Provide current sourcing for population updateIn the Austin, Texas article, you updated the population estimate without changing the old citation for that estimate. I have fixed that, but please remember to update cited sources when you make changes to things like population estimates. - Donald Albury 02:46, 19 October 2019 (UTC) Richmond, Virginia estimated population update
SourcingHowdy hello! I see that you recently made an edit to Prescott Valley, Arizona, but you didn't provide a source. I've undone the edit, but you can feel free to re-do it as long as you have a reliable source. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for November 13Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mifflinburg, Pennsylvania, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2010 census (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.) It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:58, 13 November 2019 (UTC) ArbCom 2019 election voter message
December 2019
 It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. You forgot to insert a closing ref tag </ref>, and thereby broke the census population infobox in the Demographics section in Chevy Chase Village, Maryland. Using the Show preview button would have prevented this mistake. Slow down, you are editing too fast. Result of your not using the preview button - Demographics section. Isaidnoway (talk) 00:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC) February 2020
Census RequestPlease update the census in Topeka, Kansas, like you are doing other communities. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 14:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Ways to improve 1916 United States presidential election in AlabamaHello, TylerKutschbach, Thank you for creating 1916 United States presidential election in Alabama. I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer. Amkgp (talk) 04:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC) Ways to improve 1924 United States presidential election in KentuckyHello, TylerKutschbach, Thank you for creating 1924 United States presidential election in Kentucky. I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer. Amkgp (talk) 04:10, 19 April 2020 (UTC) Ways to improve 1924 United States presidential election in DelawareHello, TylerKutschbach, Thank you for creating 1924 United States presidential election in Delaware. I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer. Amkgp (talk) 04:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC) 1924 United States presidential election in North CarolinaHi, thanks for this article! Unfortunately I can't mark it as reviewed because it doesn't cite any sources. Can you add some? Also, a problem with U.S. presidential election articles is that many links have been set up (e.g. in the main 1924 United States presidential election article) on the assumption that articles would be created in the format "United States presidential election in North Carolina, 1924" not "1924 United States presidential election in North Carolina"-there was a decision to change the naming format a few years back. So when you create one of these articles it's a good plan to set up a redirect for links that have already been set up to the old-format name. Hope that makes sense! Blythwood (talk) 02:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC) I have sent you a note about a page you startedHello, TylerKutschbach Thank you for creating 1924 United States presidential election in Mississippi. User:Dps04, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.) Dps04 (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2020 (UTC) Your reverting at Columbus, OhioI hope you know edit wars are not allowed or respected on Wikipedia? I've been overhauling this article, and included the earliest population count, from when the city was first settled. I stated this in my edit summaries twice, and you clearly didn't even read it, nonetheless respond. Please respect the wishes of the primary article editors, and understand that when people disagree with you, constant reverting isn't going to help, and is just going to land you banned from the site. It's why we have talk pages, please use them. ɱ (talk) 01:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
ANI
Use of generic census landing pageAs in this edit for Jersey City, New Jersey, why do you provide a link to a generic landing page here, rather than point to specific sources for the specified state (and for the city, where populationis greater than 5,000)? You have access to the sources, why not make it infinitely easier for a reader to actually find the source, rather than have to poke around on the Census Bureau's landing page? Alansohn (talk) 03:10, 22 May 2020 (UTC) Signing postHi, when signing the end of you posts, it's much better if you use four tildes (~~~~). This will produce a standard format with your username and time stamp in a standard format. You can customise your signature in you preference within some limitations if you wish. See WP:Signatures for more information. Nil Einne (talk) 12:32, 22 May 2020 (UTC) Population densityHi Tyler - First of all, huge thank you for taking on the task of updating the US city articles to their 2019 estimated populations. I wanted to give you a heads-up about the population density figure in the cities' infoboxes. Right now, your script updates the comment next to the figure from "2018 est." to "2019 est.", but the density is not actually getting updated. Would you consider either calculating the new density or having the script keep the comment that the figure is from the 2018 estimate? I recommend just keeping the 2018 comment unless you would like to calculate the densities by hand. There is an "auto" function for pop density, but unfortunately it incorrectly calculates based on total area rather than land area. --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC) Citations (again)Please include |publisher=United States Census Bureau in your estimate citation. Or better yet, just use the following simple template: <ref name="Census-Estimate">{{cite web |date=May 2020 |title=Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Incorporated Places in Washington: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019 |url=https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-total-cities-and-towns.html |publisher=United States Census Bureau |accessdate=}}</ref> Incomplete citations are not conducive for verifiability. SounderBruce 06:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC) Where I got presidential map resultsI got the results by county off of Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. The site is here: https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/. The actual maps I created by using templates from this user. I used the online SVG editor Vectr to recolor the counties based on vote margins using the standard colors for those margins already in use on Wikipedia (I use a map of the 2016 presidential election in Mississippi for this task as it has the largest distribution of colors). WhittleMario (talk) 15:12, 10 June 2020 (UTC) Presidential election result tablesPlease stop reverting my edits to such tables, as you did with Cook County, Illinois. The new templates have consensus as seen here and here, and are better in that they are sortable. If you disagree with their implementation please create a discussion in the appropriate places but do not revert them without clear consensus in that direction. Thanks! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Third opinion: Per policy, consensus decisions made at a Wikiproject such as those linked above do not create an encyclopedia-wide consensus which requires something to be done one way or another in articles throughout the encyclopedia. Consensus decisions made at WikiProjects have no more effect than an essay. See this from the Consensus policy:
And also this from the WikiProject Council guide, which has been approved as a guideline:
In light of those policies the consensuses reached at those Wikiprojects are merely nonbinding essays suggesting how members of those projects ought to consider go about formatting tables. How they are to actually be formated in any particular mainspace article must, however, be determined by consensus upon an article-by-article basis. If a standard applicable throughout Wikipedia is desired, the WP:PROPOSAL procedure should be used to form a formal policy or guideline with the proper location for that attempt to be at an existing policy or guideline page such as an appropriate location in the Manual of Style, not at a Wikiproject. As for these particular articles, consensus needs to be reached on their individual talk pages. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:00, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
References
1916 United States presidential election in Kentucky moved to draftspaceAn article you recently created, 1916 United States presidential election in Kentucky, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "
August 2020
Your submission at Articles for creation: 1920 United States presidential election in Kentucky (August 14)
Was curiousHow long? When? Looks hmm? And straight sharp shiney things are great and pretty fun. Only thing I fear is my father God. Do you? How are you? MerryLeeGrace1975 (talk) 03:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC) ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
CapitalizationHello. Please stop capitalizing words that aren't proper nouns. See WP:Capitalization. I mentioned this in a previous revert, so you're not unaware of it. If you keep doing this, you will be reported. Cheers. HandsomeFella (talk) 20:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC) December 2020
What is with your edits with the government section of counties? You're removing the hundredths value with no modification to rounding the tenths value. Are these automated like your population density update edits? You need to be aware that these edits are considered disruptive. Please pay more attention to how you're editing these articles. – The Grid (talk) 01:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for all your hard work with election data. I was curious about the data you added with this edit at Kenton County, Kentucky. I looked at the source cited, and was only able to find Kentucky's state-wide results for 1880, not the county results. Where should I look? Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 22:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC) You can look at the Wikipedia page for the 1880 county results for Kentucky.
The user Luokehao found the results on US Election Atlas.
ANI
January 2021
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC) TylerKutschbach (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I want to be unblocked because I’m not doing anything wrong, I didn’t put any unsourced content because the county election results I’ve been inserting are mentioned by their state on each county by looking at the pages like 1908 presidential election in North Carolina I added the 1908 results and that’s where I found the results and Magnolia677 doesn’t believe me and keeps removing them. TylerKutschbach (talk) 15:28, 3 January 2021 (UTC) Decline reason: We don't need to believe you, we need you to provide citations from reliable sources. And you haven't been doing that. Yamla (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2021 (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.
I also asked this Wikipedia user named Luokehao where he found the results. He was also the user who added the county results for each state election by year. TylerKutschbach (talk) 03:41, 4 January 2021 (UTC) Reliable and verifiable sources are absolutely required in articlesYou added data for 1896 and 2020 election results for Cumberland County, New Jersey in this edit, which was reverted in this edit as "unsourced content". While the removal violated WP:PRESERVE, it's your failure to add sources in the first place that created the problem. If you have a source, add the source so that any editor reading the article knows exactly where you got the information. Don't demand an unblock by saying that you had found the data in a source; ask for an unblock by saying that you will add a source for each and every edit going forward. How many warnings does it take to understand that adding unsourced material is unacceptable? Alansohn (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation
January 2021You have been blocked from editing for a period of 5 days for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for this edit at Penobscot County, Maine, where you added the presidential election results from 1880. You cited this source, though I have been unable to locate the 1880 presidential results for Penobscot County. Could you please point me to the exact URL where those results are located? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC) For 1880 here’s the link for it http://geoelections.free.fr/EU/elec_comtes/1880.htm TylerKutschbach (talk) 20:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
http://geoelections.free.fr/USA/elec_comtes/1880.htm if you go to this link you will see a link saying xlsx at the bottom and you will receive the county results for 25 euros. TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I didn’t spent to buy the results. That’s expensive to buy. TylerKutschbach (talk) 18:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I think the question would be who did get the results? TylerKutschbach (talk) 18:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=3359 I finally found where the results are coming from. Here’s the Maine results from 1904 and you can even find the other state results for each county as well. TylerKutschbach (talk) 06:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Specificity in sourcesIn this edit, you added this source as a reference, but with no specificity of what is being used to source the data. You need to be far more specific in the references being used. Alansohn (talk) 13:51, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Your numbers don't add up...Hello, You recently undid my revert without any explanation... I reverted your edit because a number of your percentages do not add up to 100%... for example, 1920, you claim 60.1% voted Republican, 39.4% Democrat, and 0.6% Other, which adds up to 100.1% of the total votes... the same is true for a number of other years, as well as your changes to the number of votes cast to some years (without any citations changed)... can you please explain how you are claiming +100% of the votes without any citations? - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC) Someone told me that for the percentages you round the tenths like for example 60.07% that’s 60.1% or if it’s 60.04% that’s 60.0% TylerKutschbach (talk) 02:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I just noticed this edit of yours, again changing the number of votes cast, as well as changing the math so it adds up to more than 100%. It seems you have just kept on making your unsourced edits without ever replying to my last message regarding this same issue. Please provide a source for your new voting numbers, or further edits may be considered disruptive. - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I found that for the 1976 results for Fayette County, Ohio it added up to 99.9% the other percentages that I reverted for 1976 did add up to 100% TylerKutschbach (talk) 20:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/math/roundingnumbers.php heres the source for rounding the percentages TylerKutschbach (talk) 20:20, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/ Here’s the source TylerKutschbach (talk) 23:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
http://maps.ohioelectionresults.com/internal/P/1856 Here’s where I found the 1856 results TylerKutschbach (talk) 03:09, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
TylerKutschbach: you did it again with this edit. What is going on here? Haven't you learn from what Adolphus79, Magnolia677 and others have already mentioned? Quite frankly, this is getting old rather fast. -- Dolotta (talk) 20:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Still doing itYou are STILL changing numbers of votes cast, which do not match your sources. Specifically this edit, you changed the number of votes cast in 1900 for the "other" party from 135 to 106, even though the source you provided shows 135 votes cast. You also changed the percentages for that year to different numbers that DO NOT match your own source, let alone the other years that now add up to over 100%. The same is true for the 1896 and 1892 results. It looks like you have continued doing mass changes without any concern for accuracy or Wikipedia guidelines. Please explain... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:24, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
ANI notice
Missouri map, 1860Hey TylerKutschbach, I recently uploaded File:Missouri Presidential Election Results 1860.svg to Wikipedia and added it to 1860 United States presidential election in Missouri. While it has the correct county-wide results, the borders of the counties are incorrect (I sourced shapes of the map from File:Missouri Presidential Election Results 1884.svg, which has the modern-day county lines). I've seen that you have uploaded many presidential election maps to Wikipedia, and I was wondering if you could fix the borders for this map to keep them in line with what they were at the time, as I am not very good with fixing SVG shapes. Some sources you can use are File:PresidentialCounty1860Colorbrewer.gif and this website. Thanks! -- Politicsfan4 (talk) 02:14, 2 February 2021 (UTC) You are being discussed at ANI (Feb 2021)
February 2021 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Fences&Windows 23:55, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Your block is for disruptive editing, in the form of persistently adding unsourced content or changing figures without references on hundreds of articles. Attempts to discuss including four ANI threads and several blocks have failed - the user is uncommunicative and does not volunteer sources, and they fail verification when provided. It is indefinite, meaning you will only be unblocked if you successfully appeal. Fences&Windows 23:57, 16 February 2021 (UTC) {{unblock | reason=I want to be unblocked because I am not disruptive and I found these 2020 results on Dave Leip's Atlas and there was a source for those results already in a results table so please unblock me. I don’t want to be blocked indefinitely [[User:TylerKutschbach|TylerKutschbach]] ([[User talk:TylerKutschbach#top|talk]]) 00:02, 17 February 2021 (UTC)}} I also want to learn to communicate and learn how to add a source when I find one. TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
I promise to communicate this time. TylerKutschbach (talk) 01:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC) I promise that I will answer the questions this time before I can edit again TylerKutschbach (talk) 03:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC) @The Grid: I now understand how uncommunicative and not so good sourced I was. I’m so sorry, even when I reverted some of those results you and other users reverted from me, it was all wrong for me to revert. TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2021 (UTC)  TylerKutschbach (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I now understand how wrong I was using poorly sourced contentTylerKutschbach (talk) 5:38 am, Yesterday (UTC+0) Accept reason: We have established communication and you appear to understand the reason for the block and our sourcing standards. Fences&Windows 20:38, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
1. For the county pages that I added for the results from 1880 to 1908 I saw the results on their election pages on Wikipedia by year and state and I do strongly believe Wikipedia is not a reliable source. 2. An edit I would make now is adding the 2020 results for each county. 3. There is a source for the county results in the table for this website Dave Leip's Atlas and it presents the results for each election year. TylerKutschbach (talk) 17:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
I want to change my editing style by being careful of what I edit that would make sense. The importance of reliable sources and verifiability is to make sure it is true. Dave Leip's Atlas is a reliable source because it mentions results for each state and each county. TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
For Los Angeles County, I added the results from 1852 to 1876 last month and I found a source and cited the source like this [1] TylerKutschbach (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC) References
I removed the presidential election results from Finney County, Kansas, because the reference doesn't point at the specific data in this article. Please do not restore. Discuss at Talk:Finney County, Kansas. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:20, 24 February 2021 (UTC) You need to explain where you are getting old election results from uselectionatlas.org website at Talk:Finney County, Kansas (not here). • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
March 16 Edit War with IP User 2600:1009:B14F:7EA5:99E0:87AC:A203:18F2
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.
I talked to the user and told it to stop being involved with an edit war with me. TylerKutschbach (talk) 04:31, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
The issue is some county pages don’t have the 2020 results or they have the results but just needed to be updated and Dave Leip’s Atlas is where I saw the 2020 results. TylerKutschbach (talk) 04:49, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Please identify your sourceWith this edit at Finney County, Kansas, you added presidential election results back to 1888. To support your edit, you provided this source. I am unable to locate the presidential election results back to 1888 at the source provided. Could you please list the exact steps to take to find those results at the source cited? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC) To find the results at the cite you’ll need an account for the website because the county data is available to site members. TylerKutschbach (talk) 23:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1888&fips=20&f=0&off=0&elect=0%5D%5Bimg%5Duselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/img.php?year=1888&off=0&elect=0&fips=20&evt=&type=map&st=KS%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D here’s a link for Kansas in 1888 and the only way to see the results is by having an account for each county TylerKutschbach (talk) 02:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC) Vandalism of Wikipedia is not tolerated
I was just reverting the presidential results back. All county pages have the results for each election and there’s no reason to remove them. TylerKutschbach (talk) 01:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Important Notice This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. ― Tartan357 Talk 08:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC) March 2021
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Fences&Windows 08:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I was just adding the 2020 results from every county page because they were missing the 2020 results. There was also already a source to where the results are found.TylerKutschbach (talk) 23:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC) @Fences and windows:
@Tartan357: I do understand the instructions. I know how to cite a source, please give me a second chance. TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC) @Tartan357: also you gave me a warning about me if I reverted the Pennsylvania 2020 election page again I would be blocked but I didn’t do it again after the first revert. I would’ve never gotten blocked if I didn’t do that again. TylerKutschbach (talk) 02:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
TylerKutschbach (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I understand that I forgot to cite the source for where I found the results. TylerKutschbach (talk) 14:45, 31 March 2021 (UTC) Decline reason: You say that you understand, but your history indicates that you've said that before and still show that you don't understand. I'm not sure if you lack the skills needed to participate here, or you simply don't care, but I agree that a topic ban would not modify your behavior. A good start towards getting unblocked would be to demonstrate proper sourcing on this page, perhaps with also agreeing to only submit edit requests regarding adding sources for a period of time- but in any event, I suggest that you review WP:REFB and spend much time becoming familiar with it before making another request, I am declining this one. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 1 April 2021 (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.
@Vanjagenije: can you unblock me please. I made a clear reason why I was blocked and I was wrong to not source.TylerKutschbach (talk) 16:49, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Adolphus79: I really do understand the guidelines and policies and do know how to source. There was already a source in the table results but maybe it needed to be updated or something. TylerKutschbach (talk) 22:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC) @Magnolia677: what kind of topic ban? TylerKutschbach (talk) 23:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC) @Adolphus79: what topic ban would you suggest for me TylerKutschbach (talk) 01:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC) Okay. We cannot just take your word for it; please demonstrate your knowledge. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC) @331dot: here’s an example of a cited source [1] TylerKutschbach (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tdl1060: can you unblock me. I added an unblock request. TylerKutschbach (talk) 03:04, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Adolphus79: I was just tagging them to get the attention of my unblock request. I’ve been waiting to be unblocked since I’ve got blocked again this week. TylerKutschbach (talk) 05:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Magnolia677: Dave Leip’s Atlas is a reliable source. I mentioned to you before, just click any state you want to look at on the site and if you click on a county they’ll show you the 2020 results TylerKutschbach (talk) 12:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jpgordon: would a different page on Dave Leip’s work for citing a better source to show the results like the page showing the county results? TylerKutschbach (talk) 17:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
[2] Here’s an example it’s for Richmond County, New York also known as Staten Island. TylerKutschbach (talk) 21:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tdl1060: so that’s probably why me and some other Wikipedia users were having issues getting access to see the results from elections prior to 2000 TylerKutschbach (talk) 03:01, 3 April 2021 (UTC) @Jpgordon: I also did asked this Wikipedia user HappyElectionsNerd83 where the user found the results because the user is the one who did add the results table for the historical results and the user has not responded back to me. TylerKutschbach (talk) 18:30, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jpgordon: here’s the for-sale page for the website [3] TylerKutschbach (talk) 20:36, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jpgordon: ok. Hopefully the next person who sees my request will accept it. TylerKutschbach (talk) 04:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
@C.Fred: here’s an example for adding the 2020 results for Thurston County, Nebraska which I did add before but it was removed and here’s a source for the county results for 2020. [4] TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tartan357: I promise to add the source this time, and what I meant to say is I added the results on that page but not the source I provided here. I’m trying to prove that those are the accurate results. TylerKutschbach (talk) 01:53, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tartan357: I swear that I will cite sources this time. I don’t want anymore trouble. TylerKutschbach (talk) 02:43, 8 April 2021 (UTC) TylerKutschbach (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I want to be unblocked because I promise to source for real this time. Decline reason: I'm declining this, as there isn't any reason to think that the most recent exhortions by you to follow sourcing obligations will be met when your last set of promises were not. While the standard offer will apply (and to clarify, I definitely don't count your user talk page edits as resetting the six months. It is 6 months from when you were indeffed, and will generally only reset on socking or unsuccessful appeals. I would like to stress that beneficial contributions on other projects, such as simple wikipedia, could be particularly advantegeous here since you'll need to show what has changed in the interim. Obviously a block there would likely kill off any chance of appealing here. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:56, 18 April 2021 (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. Tyler, I can't speak for Wikipedia's admin corp, but this looks to be a classic WP:STICK situation. You were indefinitely blocked over two weeks ago now. If an admin was inclined to unblock you, it is probably safe to say that you would have been unblocked by now. It may be best at this time to come back in October and see if an administrator is willing to entertain a standard offer. -- Dolotta (talk) 20:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Procedural break (6(ish) months later)@Tartan357: I’ve now waited 6 months TylerKutschbach (talk) 10:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC) TylerKutschbach (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I’ve now waited 6 months to have the standard offer. TylerKutschbach (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC) Decline reason: I think your history here, and your history on Commons, indicate it would not benefit Wikipedia to unblock you a month after drawing an one year ban for similar behavior on Commons. WP:SO is not satisfied. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 19:29, 1 October 2021 (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.
@Adolphus79: Tartan357 told me that I’d wait until September 30. I learned to source/cite a website on Citation Machine. I want a fourth chance because I was proving the results for those counties are accurate and I was helping my Wikipedia friend John M Wolfson templatizing the county election results tables for the way he wants them to be. TylerKutschbach (talk) 04:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Adolphus79. I don't believe TylerKutschbach should be unblocked at this time. Tyler has been active over at commons since his block here in late March and is now currently serving a one year block there as well (c:Special:Contributions/TylerKutschbach). Also, considering the close spacing of their previous blocks here, I am unsure whether they will be able to be a sucessful member of the community. -- Dolotta (talk) 15:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
TylerKutschbach (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I’ve waited 6 months without sockpuppetry and want a fourth chance. TylerKutschbach (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2021 (UTC) Decline reason: Nothing you have said gives me any thought that you will be a productive editor if unblocked. Keeping you blocked is the best thing for Wikipedia. RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:37, 21 October 2021 (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. Tyler, you were given what I believe to be a rather definitive no from Jpgordon the other day. I don't think anything has happened in the interim to change anything. -- Dolotta (talk) 15:56, 3 October 2021 (UTC) @Dolotta: all I want to do is make things right for real this time and even help John M Wolfson with his request on the Reward Board. TylerKutschbach (talk) 19:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
@Adolphus79: I promise to follow through this time. TylerKutschbach (talk) 19:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
@The Grid: is the rope thing giving blocked users one last chance as I read in the article of the rope. TylerKutschbach (talk) 01:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Reviewing admin (courtesy ping to Jpgordon): Please consider talk page access removal. Looking at his commons talk page, it looks like multiple unblock requests have been made there and I suspect that it might happen here as well. -- Dolotta (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC) Blocked for sockpuppetry
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TylerKutschbach. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
