Ta-da! My reference box. This is where I put references for my articles. It allows me to keep all my references in one place so I can copy and paste them as I go, and also to go back and re-read something in case I forget what I was going to add. You're welcome to add references here, too, just place them at the top of the box and watch your refs be put into the article. To add something, click here to ref!
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You have previously expressed an interest in undergoing the Admin coaching program. We're currently engaged in a program reset to help things move more smoothly in the future. If you are still interested in the program, please go to Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Requests for Coaching and re-list yourself under Current requests, deleting your entry from Older requests. Also, double-check to make sure coaching is right for you at theCoachee checklist; WP:Adoption or WP:Editor review may be more appropriate depending on your situation and aspirations. We should get back to you within a day or so, once a coaching relationship has been identified. Thank you. MBisanztalk20:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for the info. I think I suspected that they were trying some things, but they wound up "breaking" the infobox - hence the level 1 warning. Friendly, link to the sandbox, etc., no intention of reporting them unless they continually repeated the issue. If they're constructive, it's a non-issue for me :) --Umrguy42 (talk) 23:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXII - March 2008
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The March 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --16:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hi GP, unfortunately I'm already admin coaching Compwhizii and probably should concentrate on one person at a time. I'm happy to keep informally mentoring you, but if you want a dedicated coach, perhaps you should ask the coaching coordinator MBisanz to set you up. ~ Riana ⁂16:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ooh, spooky :P Hope it works out for you, sorry I have to decline. I'd be happy to help but it'd probably mean doing a crap job for both of you rather than a decent job for one. ~ Riana ⁂16:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for asking, but right now I'm full up with my current candidate. Right now I'm trying to assign new candidates based either on how long they've been waiting for a coach or how close they are to RfA, with a bias towards movingout users who are very close to RfA. You can try contacting other admins who you think might be free to coach or have you done adoption? Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. its a good way to gain general experience while waiting for a coaching slot to free up. Also, we do have the somwhat limited self-coaching area at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Requests_for_Coaching#Other_options. MBisanztalk17:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Why are you asking for admin-coaching, Gp75motorsports, if you're planning on leaving Wikipedia in about 10 more user talk edits? Metros (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There's no point taking my name out of my sig, type George D Watson on google and you get about 2,030,000 results. Even if I took my name out of my sig, my name's on my user page (and other people's names are on theirs) so the chances of getting stalked are limited. George D. Watson (Dendodge).TalkHelp17:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Please be careful with your edits and edit summaries. In this case, an edit labeled as "huge bias" served only to introduce spelling errors. You later nominated the school for speedy deletion as an advertisement, something it doesn't qualify for. WP:SCHOOL notes that it may, however, be suitable for redirection if there is not sufficient encyclopedic merit to the school itself. — Lomn19:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago13 comments5 people in discussion
Violation of topic ban: [2]
If you wish me to reconsider, or get a third party admin to look, use {{unblock}}. To the reviewing admin: I give permission to undo this block without discussing with me first. Maxim(talk)22:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC){{unblock|It was a typo, and I felt it my duty to correct it. It wasn't like I was adding a new section or comment; I was just fixing a typo.}}Reply
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
This was much too harsh, it's not that severe a violation. He has the right to read whatever, including ArbCom cases, and fixing a typo IMO isn't worth a 2 week block. Keilana|Parlez ici23:13, 17 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I was writing to express my belief that the block was excessive and, one supposes, unnecessary, but I edit-conflicted with Keilana, and so I am now able to spare everyone my usual verbosity. I will, though, convey to Gp the reminder that I intended to offer: It is (almost always) in exceedingly bad form to edit the comments of another editor; if one acts to correct an obvious and distracting typo or to fix a link in order that a comment should make sense, he may probably do so, but should probably note that he made a change to another's post. Here, for the record, you replaced one perfectly comprehensible—entirely correct (in fact, a discussion at en.wikt points to sources that suggest that "incivil" is regarded by many as obsolete and disfavored in preference to "uncivil"; I'm not really a prescriptivist, so I'm fine with either, but I can safely say that I'd never substitute the word that is widely regarded as "proper" for that which is regarded as not)—word with another, and although you acted, as ever, in good faith, you, in endeavoring to correct an error that wasn't an error, were more than a bit patronizing. Joe23:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
Erm, the unblock's still not working. In direction to Joe, thanks. I wasn't aware until now that there was an alternate spelling to the word, and to Keilana, thanks for unblocking me, although the system's still being stupid. :) --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER00:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Open your card >> >> >>
Happy easter you guys! Sorry if the picture looked crappy, but it's the best I could do on such short notice. Sincerely, BoL (Talk) 04:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC) Credits: This card was inspired by BoL, an administrator/bureaucrat and head designer of Codesnippets. Join the community today!Reply
—On a side note, I've left you a message there. Cheers!
Latest comment: 16 years ago19 comments5 people in discussion
The point of your topic ban was to get you to focus on improving articles and such. Lately it appears like all you want to do is stick your thoughts in on others' situations (such as this, this, or this). Please focus on positive editing and not inserting yourself unnecessarily elsewhere. Metros (talk) 19:14, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Okay, fine. I can do without your personal attacks and stalking. I've never told you to go away. I've never even wanted you to go away. You know that as damn well as I do. But you just TRY to find a reason to indef me. Per your diff I was simply trying to keep the guy from trolling, but I get attacked for it? Is that the way it works here? Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER23:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Where are these personal attacks that you say were said? As for "stalking", you know very well that your edits are being tracked by other editors because of the ban. And Kingrock is not trolling, so let's not throw that word around against people with good intentions. Metros (talk) 23:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Your edit summary of seriously? go away for starters. And I know that I'm being tracked, but I wish I wasn't because it's uncomfortable and basically says to me that I'm not trustworthy. It's why I've been trying to avoid editing. I don't want so many people watching me. But you haven't been blocked five times. You wouldn't understand what it's like. --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER23:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I don't understand because when others give advice, I take it. I don't just ignore what others suggest and continuously get in trouble for it. "Seriously? Go away" is no where close to a personal attack. It's related to the fact that you said you wouldn't do what you did in butting in in others' conversations and you did exactly that. The edit summary I used was to express the shock I had that you would have the audacity to do the opposite of what you said you would do and the frustration of having you butting in, yet again, in an issue of none of your concern. Metros (talk) 23:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
(outdent) GP, your talk page is on my watchlist, so I can see this conversation and I'm flying in here to help you; Mate, you're in a bit of a hole. Stop digging. Urgently. Walk away from the keyboard now, and when you come back, edit articles only. For heaven's sake mate, your ban was too liberal: You should have been restricted to article edits only (no talk pages at all). Good luck in your article only no-talk-page-babbling-editing-career. If you want to be on the Wiki inside, please hark my words. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I agree-it was entirely too liberal. I've requested to be topic-banned from the user talk space before, but I haven't been. Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER
You know, you could have avoided it yourself. It's called self control. The reason you weren't banned out of the user talk is because it is often critical to use the user talk space for collaboration on articles and other discussion. Metros (talk) 00:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Sure, I've removed user talk: from your allowed namespaces. You're now only allowed to edit this page and to make essential posts (ie vandal warnings, speedy warnings etc.) Maxim(talk)00:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
You know what? The likes of Metros and Daniel are not around because they want to be a pain in the arse. They are around because they think that Wiki is a good idea, and is worth protecting. Now, as to the future. GP, you should have been restricted to article edits only, but now you say that you agree to this. So that's fine. And d'you know what else? You get to edit Wiki with your own spelling checkers, me and Daniel and Metros in tow. So whenever you edit an article, they'll be there to back you up. So how good is that. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
No, nobody's g'na help save your latest article. About drums or anything else. If the drum making company is notable, somebody will come along to write an article about them to which you can contribute. And that's cool. But this evening your comments on user talk pages were taking you down the fast lane to a big block, a problem that seems to have now dispersed. And that's also cool. In the strongest possible terms I would now urge you to follow a very low profile article only Wiki career. No user or article talk pages. With which I wish you well, my friend. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 01:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Your welcome. Edit articles from now on. Hell, I'll help you to do so, find refs and so on. But, be aware that as far as I'm concerned I saved you from a major hole of your own digging this evening: your intemperate remarks were fast tracking you to a ban.
So, here's an offer. I'll help you on the articles where I can, and in return you'll stick to editing articles. No article talk or user talk edits, plus no Wiki space edits. OK? Just articles. If you fool around, I'll go to AN/I and ask them to throw you to the lions. Clear?
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
A tag has been placed on Corder Drum Co. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
Elections are now taking place for coordinators of the project for the next six months. Any editors interested in seeking a coordinator position, or who want a say in who is selected, should indicate as much here.
Member news
The project has currently 381 members, 69 joined & 0 leavers since the start of March 2008.
Other news
The project's long-time lead coordinator, Kevinalewis, has announced he is not standing as a candidate for another term in that capacity. We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to him for the extraordinary work he has done for this project.
Welcome to the Twenty Third issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do.
We would encourage all members to get more involved and if you are wondering what with, please ask.
Last month's challenge (South Wind) was completed by member User:Blathnaid with a nice starting stub.
The first person to start the article is mentioned in the next newsletter. This month's article is Kate Christensen's 2008 PEN/Faulkner award winner The Great Man.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.
Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
My friend, didn't we have a conversation about a week ago in which you promised to edit articles only? See [4]. You remember: it was not long after you very nearly talked yourself into about a month in the cooler. Now, what part of that conversation didn't I understand?
AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
The rule was that I was only allowed to make essential posts. If that guy found a subpage of mine that I really had very (and I emphasize very) little knowledge of, it's entirely likely he could have been doing some digging for my password and randomly found that. Trust me, I only post when I think it's urgent nowadays and I just wanted to mke sure my account wasn't compromised again, as it has been twice before. --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER17:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
OK. Whatever you think's best. What are subpages anyway? I don't have any, and I seem to be able to contribute to the encyclopedia very easily. :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 17:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I get by without that stuff. Anyway, be careful. Make sure you stick to articles only. Make good contributions there, ignore all the other nonsense, and the pressure I'm sure you feel you are under will go away. :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 17:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago41 comments10 people in discussion
You have been blocked for violating your topic ban, yet again. Image:U-Car Racing Temporary.jpg is where this violation occurred (it has since been deleted). You edited outside your restricted space and used a photo that you just grabbed off a website and used that photo in your sandbox only (a violation of fair use rules). Metros (talk) 00:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
And a note to whoever eventually reviews his inevitable unblock request, he was not simply blocked for uploading the photo (I'll give a bit of leeway with the ban with that), but because he then used it inappropriately, did not provide proper status for it, only uploaded it as a placeholder for a future photo, and then edited the photo description later to note it was only a placeholder. All of these add up to a definite violation of the restriction to article, talk, and user talk spaces. Metros (talk) 00:47, 13 April 2008 (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).
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.
Dammit, I want a rename so I can ecscape this username which has wrought so much bad luck on me. *->(NOT)<-* under RTV, either. Or to evade this ban.
The bureaucrats would not honour such a request, I think, and you are banned from creating any alternate accounts under the restriction enacted by consensus of the community. Any use of alternate accounts by yourself would most likely result in an indefinite block of all accounts and an indefinite ban from editing Wikipedia. Daniel (talk) 01:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
If you're actually looking to be unblocked, I suggest you have a rationale other than what you have now. Also, I think you should stop blaming your user name for these blocks... Metros (talk) 01:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
You know the rules under which you should be editing, you have shown no willingness to edit in the manner prescribed by the community, so it is only fair that you now find yourself blocked from editing. You should be thankful it is only two weeks and not an indefinite block. Administrators really do not have time to waste on you and your antics anymore. If you persist when your block expires, you will be banned from editing Wikipedia, full stop. Nick (talk) 01:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Re to Metros: Firstly, I wouldn't dare create another account aside from the 1 1/2 I have now, as I'm not really an idiot. Secondly, I only tossed that reason for a renaming out there as I was a little mad. The real reason is users (and therefore vandals) from Arena Racing USA, the small indoor series I race in, will likely edit-stalk me if I continue with this name for too long, and besides, I'm known as this or something like it everywhere I go (YouTube, Fanfiction.net, Code Snippets Wiki, and Wikia) and I'm getting bored of it. Also, the rationale I have for being unblocked is that you can't simply block me for not knowing that I can't upload an image.
Re to Nick: Yes I have. As a matter of fact I uploaded that image to actually improve the encyclopedia for once, as I have decidedly (both by myself and others) not been doing. If you will unblock me by Monday I will have a legitimate picture of one by the next day if I can. --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER01:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Is the image space in the article space? Is it in the talk space? Is it in the user talk space? The answers are: no, no, and no. So you should have known that. Metros (talk) 01:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I could maybe understand a block for violation of the topic ban, but if you're saying (Metros) that you're giving leeway there -- the uploading of photos without proper license info, improper use, etc, isn't something we normally block people over. That seems like an honest mistake to me -- he just didn't realize.
Even if this is for violation of the topic ban, uploading a photo is much less obviously in a particular namespace than other things are. When you want to upload a photo, you just click "upload file" -- you don't need to type in "image:" or anything.
I think this can be overturned with a warning. Equazcion•✗/C •02:16, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
(ec) Oh come on... We've established that it's easy enough to upload a photo without realizing you're editing in image space. Editing that same file's summary isn't too big a stretch from that. Picture it this way: you upload a file, leave the page up on your screen, notice something wrong in the description and hit edit. It could still be an honest mistake, and it furthermore wasn't the least bit harmful or disruptive. I know you've had to deal with a lot from this user, but this is probably the least block-worthy thing he's ever done. Let alone a 2-week block. Equazcion•✗/C •02:56, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
He went back to edit it 6 days later (uploaded on the 7th, edited again on the 13th). He clearly knew he was going into a space that was restricted due to the ban. This is especially true since he has a script enabled that warns when he edits anything but articles, talk pages, or user talk pages. Metros (talk) 03:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I took a look at his monobook.js. His allowed namespaces are "0, 1, 6, 7". 6 and 7 are "image:" and "image talk:" (Wikipedia:Namespace#Enumeration). So if the topic ban did indeed cover image spaces, the script was not reminding him of that. Equazcion•✗/C •03:09, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
GP, since it seems the blocking admin has either lost interest or is away, you might want to post a second unblock request to call attention to this. Equazcion•✗/C •16:40, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
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).
reason —Gp75 is still responsible for not violating his ban. The ultimate responsibility is his, not the script's. Gp75 seems to fail to realize it he, not his username, that is causing all these problems, that is his basic problem; not accepting due responsibility and crying foul when he does something wrong. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:57, 13 April 2008 (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.
For those of us who haven't been following this drama we simply can't do this without links to the editing restriction so we know what we are reviewing. What is the point of the discussion about your monobook? SpartazHumbug!16:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
User_talk:Gp75motorsports/Archive_2#Notification_of_topic_ban. It was agreed that Gp75's monobook.js would be protected and a script inserted that would alert him whenever he attempted to edit within a namespace covered by the ban. There was (and continues to be) a mistake in that script, which allowed Gp75motorsports to edit the Image: namespace without being alerted. This has now led to a block, since the user inadvertently edited the Image: namespace, apparently without realizing he wasn't allowed to. In light of the script error, which was not Gp75's fault, I feel he deserves the benefit of the doubt here. Thanks for your attention to this, Spartaz. Equazcion•✗/C •17:04, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
The script is merely a convenience to him. He is still responsible for knowing his restrictions regardless of whether the little script tells him not to edit there or not. Metros (talk) 17:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Granted, however since the script was invoked, he hasn't (to my knowledge) edited any namespace for which it alerted him correctly, so it stands to reason that this was an honest mistake. Combined with the fact that the edits in question weren't disruptive, I think a 2-week block is excessive. Perhaps it could be reduced to a couple of days instead. Equazcion•✗/C •17:17, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
If you look at his contributions, you'll see he has 15 user space edits, 7 Wikipedia space, 2 image space (not counting those deleted yesterday), 1 image talk, and 3 Wikipedia talk edits since the script was enabled on January 17th. So, he has edited outsie the restrictions even with the script on. As for 2 weeks being excessive: it's an escalating system. He's been blocked for several days in the past, and it keeps continuing, so 2 weeks is just another step in the process. Metros (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I didn't know about that. I just took a look at his contribs. I'm not convinced the Wikipedia namespace edits are applicable, but there certainly is an excess of needless user talk edits. I have to support the block then. Sorry Gp. Equazcion•✗/C •17:34, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
Technically, he's not banned from the user talk space, but he is restricted from the "main" user space. The consensus was to keep user talk available to him so that he could (hopefully) collaborate on articles with others. Mostly his user talk edits have been unnecessary though. See User_talk:Gp75motorsports#Look.... In that discussion you'll see he basically agree to stick to the article space, but I don't think we've really seen the results since then. Metros (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
No I agree, I see a definite excess of user talk edits. Things like this and this are not in the spirit of collaborating on article writing. They are examples of the kind of user-policing that the topic ban was intended to stop. I withdraw my concern over the block. Equazcion•✗/C •17:46, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
Listen, Metros, like I said, you can't ban me over a stupid userscript. The fact that the thing didn't notify me beforehand is NOT MY FAULT. All this is doing is punishing me-against this-for something I didn't know was supposed to happen! You can't DO THAT! --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER17:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Gp, we've just established that this block isn't only for this image space slipup. It seems you haven't respected the topic ban at all, and I posted links to examples above. The script is not the issue anymore. Equazcion•✗/C •17:59, 13 Apr 2008 (UTC)
I have. But I'm Metros' most recent punching bag, it seems. He knows full well that those edits (at least to my userspece) have been GOOD EDITS and yet he continues to punish me over it in his apparent efforts to make me leave. Also I have a userscript in place which prevents me from making UT edits too, unless they're here. --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER18:06, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
No, not as far as I can tell until he drops this dumbass block and stops punishing me. He doesn't even have the right to do that so I don't know why he's exercising it. --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER18:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Your ban restricts you to the main, talk, and user talk spaces (though you've agreed to voluntarily give up the user talk rights a few sections up). Your ban is enforceable by block. You edited the image space. The image space is not in one of the 3 spaces listed above. Therefore, you can be blocked for doing so. So, yes, I have a right to block you for topic ban violations. Metros (talk) 18:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Stop blaming the script. The script is just a convenience; you are still responsible for any actions you carry out and should know the restrictions of your ban. Metros (talk) 18:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I don't see any good reason to let someone who has not been able to demonstrate they understand our image copyright policies actively upload images and edit image description pages. Nick (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
We had a discussion and the community supported restricting your editing privileges, enforceable by a block. This is not something that is negotiable, and it's something he is empowered to do by that very discussion. I'm more concerned by the fact you're not providing any reason why we should unblock you. You're not actually providing any reason why we should unblock you at all, there's no reason to believe your behaviour will change once you're unblocked. I mean, come on, give us something to work with here. Nick (talk)
As someone who washed my hands of GP75 long ago, I'd like to give an opinion. I've looked over his mainspace edits, and most of them are good. There aren't quite enough, but he is doing some good work. The topic ban was imposed to steer him towards positive contributions, not to punish him. I have to say, every time he slips up (and he slips up far too often), someone swoops in with an excessive ban. GP75 doesn't need policing, he needs guiding. He doesn't need to be blocked for two weeks. He's clearly here to help and not to do harm. I think that should count for something. AniMate18:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Yes, exactly. I don't need to be slapped with a 35 blocks! Can't you look past the bad and see the good? I thought administrators were here to guide distressed users like myself, not to make them *more* distressed by blocking them for a minor slip. C'mon guys, just do your job for once in your lives! --Gp75motorsportsREV LIMITER18:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
They are doing their jobs, and they're doing an exceptional job. Insulting the admins isn't going to get you unblocked. You need to find a mentor who you will actually listen to, and you need to stop fucking up. You are clearly capable of understanding the constraints of your topic ban, but for some reason you don't or won't accept them. Have you thought that maybe this isn't the right project for you or that you aren't quite mature enough to edit here? You definitely get off on the drama of this place, so maybe an MMORPG would be a better fit. Maybe editing over at the Simple Wikipedia might not be a bad idea. AniMate19:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
If you call punishment exceptional. But I've never had a mentor so I'm still struggling while these guys block me instead of teach me. Which is what they're supposed to do. As for editing at Simple, I refuse, because I'm not, well, simple. And I accept the terms of my topic ban but as soon as I make one false edit-ONE-despite all the other good, clean contributions I make, I get hit with an illogical, punishing 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).
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.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Gp75, I was looking over the draft article that you have in your sandbox, and I saw a few things that I think might look better if rearranged. I was wondering if I could work on fixing the style of the article, since it seems at the moment it looks rather iffy. I realize that it's probably bad wikiquette to edit another user's sandbox, but since you're blocked and can't edit it, would it be okay if I clarified a few sentences in the article? Thanks, GlobeGores (talk page | user page) 05:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
You have expressed interest in undergoing the Admin coaching program. However, after reviewing your edit history, I feel you may need more time since your most recent block(s) and/or user conduct matter(s) on Wikipedia before you can know for certain your ready to begin the process of becoming an administrator. Therefore, at this time, your application for Admin Coaching has been declined.
My suggestion would be to seek adoption from a more experienced user who can help you experience all of the various components of editing an encyclopedia. If you decide adoption is not for you, there is also the editor review process that may help you find areas to improve upon in our editing. If you would like to talk more about this, please feel free to leave me a note at my talk page. MBisanztalk01:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Gp, I know you're a man who has Wiki in his heart and wants to make the encyclopedia better. So let me give you a suggestion. Wikipedia's got a dungeon of stubs and frankly crappy articles that are just waiting for someone to improve. It's Category:Orphaned articles, an absolute goldmine of stuff where with a couple of open google tabs you can make a big difference. For example, I found this [5] in the orphans and turned it into this [6] just by googling the subject. Why not have a go at the same? Make a difference. I think you have been restricting yourself to articles that you think you know something about. Don't do that. Edit or create anything you fancy. I know nothing about the church and its history, but have a look at this [7] and then this [8]. Hell, anyone can do it. Google it :-) - AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 20:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
... And, frankly speaking, I think the article that I wrote about Adrian Dingli is now the world's foremost, most all-round resource on a quite interesting person. Google him and see. First base on him is what I wrote. So you can do the same :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
If everyone feels you haven't yet learned your lesson at the end of the original period of the ban, then it will be extended as much as they feel is necessary. The fact that you're asking this question would tend to show people that you have indeed not learned your lesson yet. MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS IMPROVING AN ARTICLE. DON'T DO ANYTHING IN YOUR BANNED NAMESPACES. I'm not sure what is so difficult about this message that you haven't gotten it through your head yet. Stop asking questions about the legal details of your ban and start actually trying to solve the problem for which it was imposed. Equazcion•✗/C •12:40, 23 Apr 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for responding to this request. I just wanted to let you know I made a slight changed to your adopt offer to Hopiakuta to remove him from the cat (i moved the adoptoffer userbox to the main page and modified your comment to prompt him to accept on your talk page [9]). if /when he accepts, change the adoptoffer to adopted. Cheers, and best of luck. xenocidic (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello!
I hope this finds you well. I just thought I would drop you a little note about your offer of adoption to Hopiakuta. He clearly has good intentions, however there are some problems he has communicating and contributing- some of them are related to his using outdated software that isn't compatible with the mediawiki software, and some of them are probably related to disabilities which we have been unable to identify. In any case, I would strongly suggest that if you are not exceedingly patient, you retract your offer. If you are, then go for it. I've been working with him for quite a while and while it's a challenging case, it's rewarding. He's very smart and has a lot to contribute- both to wikipedia and the world. He will probably not actually officially want to be adopted but you can get involved by watching his contribs, giving him advice, and making sure confused people don't get too upset with him.
Here's some stuff you should probably read: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive299#User: Hopiakuta, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive328#User:hopiakuta, and User_talk:L'Aquatique#Hopiakuta. If you have any questions or need help, feel free to contact me.
Have a great weekend- L'Aquatiquetalk06:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The May 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 07:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
