User talk:WPchanger2011

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, WPchanger2011, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Liz Read! Talk! 05:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! WPchanger2011 (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo
Hello! WPchanger2011, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz Read! Talk! 05:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! WPchanger2011 (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Thunkable (January 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 21:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: So if I do not find somebody soon (February 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Numberguy6 was:
This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Articles for creation/Wizard-Redirects. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Numberguy6 (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Homo wikiaddictus

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Homo wikiaddictus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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 deleted 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. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 12:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WPchanger2011 why would you create this page and leave an edit summary of "quick before speedy delete"? ~ Eejit43 (talk) 12:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Eejit43 (Jumping in as I removed the CSD tag.) I think the summary was because the original redirect was targeting a non-existent page which would have made it WP:G8able. TartarTorte 13:40, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TartarTorte ah I see, now that makes a lot more sense. Thanks! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
so you are going to delete this... Thanks, WPchanger2011 (page | talk | contributions) 23:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, i see that it's kept. Thanks, WPchanger2011 (page | talk | contributions) 23:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.
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.
Ponyobons mots 00:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A block

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).

WPchanger2011 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

If I used this account in good faith, and even apologise for my edits on the user talk of 344766480A. However I didn't do anything wrong, and I tried my best to help build this encyclopedia, unlike what I did back in 2022. But now I'm a better person, did nothing wrong. Yes, maybe I have made mistakes, but I did not know I would get blocked without warning. And just because someone is a sockpuppet doesn't mean you should revert every edit, even ones in good faith and ones that people even sent thanks. Any response :(? So you can give reasons, but don't just not respond. And I hope you're nice per WP:5P4. Another reason why is because I want to recreate an article due to another website using that article. [1]

Decline reason:

You are admitting to being a sock. See Liz's comment below for advice on how to proceed. But this is an obvious decline. PhilKnight (talk) 06:10, 17 February 2023 (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. 

Thanks, WPchanger2011 (page | talk | contributions) 01:14, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you didn't know that sockpuppetry would result in an indefinite block, deletion of pages you created and reversion of your edits, you know now. The only way to break this cycle is to stop creating new sockpuppets, go back to your original account and request an unblock there. And, this is just my advice, it's not a good idea to complain about the time it takes for someone to review your request and refuse to take responsibility for your sockpuppetry. You want to be seen as an asset to this project, not an editor who gripes and complains about the unfair way you are being treated. That tact will not result in a positive response which I assume is your goal here. Liz Read! Talk! 05:28, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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).

WPchanger2011 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Liz I now understand I'm a sockpuppet. What if I try a clean start here, because all my data (e.g. contribs) are here, and this account had a better past than User:344766480A? Thanks, WPchanger2011 (page , talk , contributions) 20:06, 15 March 2023 (UTC) :)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address your sockpuppetry and block evasion. And no, you are not eligible for a clean start. See WP:CLEANSTART. You are not an editor in good standing. Yamla (talk) 17:22, 16 March 2023 (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.