Mikelimerick

Welcome!

Hello, Mikelimerick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jim1138 (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article CIÉ, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. RashersTierney (talk) 22:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

CIÉ

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Content needs to be verifiable. In other words, it needs to be sourced reliably. For more information, please see wp:rs and wp:citing sources. As your edits appeared to be your own opinion (please see original research) and unsourced, they were removed. Another policy of Wikipedia is to maintain a "neutral point of view", so while it may be true that CIÉ is "terribly unreliable", it is not a "neutral point of view". Please look into some of the links that I added with the welcome above. Thank you for your contributions. Jim1138 (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add talk to the middle of my talk page. It disrupts the flow of conversation and is hard to find. Use the "New section" tab at the top of the page. Jim1138 (talk) 22:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

If I had seen it, I would have deleted your edit as well. I have never heard of CIÉ before and I suspect that User talk:RashersTierney is not familiar with it either. May I suggest doing some reading on writing articles before doing more edits? Jim1138 (talk) 22:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Checking for edits that do not follow Wikipedia policy is User talk:RashersTierney's business and many other editor's business. If it were not for wp:recent changes patrol, Wikipedia would be unusable. Jim1138 (talk) 22:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

User talk:RashersTierney

Please be careful with your editing. You removed important content from User talk:RashersTierney when you edited his page. I reverted your changes to fix it. To leave a message, click on the "New section" tab at the top of the page. That works best. Jim1138 (talk) 22:49, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Mikelimerick. You have new messages at Jim1138's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Note to any reviewing admin: Compare to User:Stanbidder1. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

((unblock| excuse me i need help, i just recieved message that i am blocked for editing a bus article, i dont know what a sock puppet is, is it copying a deleted article? i saw an edit from another user who seems to be from same city as me and i thought he made a good point about the bus article so i copied him as i thought it was unfair it was deleted, i probably should not have copied the article but i am sorry if it broke rules, i wont copy an article again, thank you.Mikelimerick (talk) 14:27, 16 March 2012 (UTC)))

Stanbidder1, you made the exact same mistake in formatting (using "((unblock))" instead of "{{unblock}}") when you requested an unblock on your other account. If you want anyone to review this unblock, you should fix that. But you should also not treat us like we're idiots. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:30, 16 March 2012 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

now i know what you mean by sockpuppet, but your wrong what i did was copied that user as i thought they were correct and seems to be from my city, i am sorry for that but if you give me a chance and remove the block i will not copy an article again, give me a chance, i dont know what the point of wikipedia is if every thing you do is watched and scrutinised, but it seems some editors and admins are allowed to do what they like on here and have whatever version of an article up as they feel like, is that not favouritism? and if thats the case it seems their point of view is allowed to be shown on articles and no one elses, and why is the same administrator allowed to punish users all the time? that could be regarded as unfair as well and favouritism for some admins and editors, like they own wikipedia?, that is an unfair system. Mikelimerick (talk) 16:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 17:07, 16 March 2012 (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.

Reviewing admins should be aware of WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Stanbidder1. I blocked before this page was created, but Checkuser has since confirmed my view. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:42, 16 March 2012 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

please i am asking for a final chance all i want is to get my original account stanbidder1 unblocked and the reason is i want to prove murry1975 and flouqenbeam wrong about me i want to leave here on good terms but i am not been given a chance, i know what was wrong about the edits but i have adrressed the behaviour, you can always reblock me instantly again if i do it again but i am promising it wont happen, and yesterday all i was doing was asking murry a simple question which was did he have cie article on his watchlist but he would not give a yes or no answer, so i will not try to ask him again, i am not going to waste any more of my time on him, i want to leave here on good terms by proving them wrong,please consider giving me this chance you wont regret it please. Mikelimerick (talk) 10:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

If you want to be unblocked to prove you can edit constructively, you can follow WP:OFFER. Do not evade your block, do not edit Wikipedia for at least six months and, then, ask for an unblock using your Stanbidder1 account, convincing the reviewing admin you understand why you were blocked and undertaking not to repeat that behaviour again. Evading your block and using socks is not the way to go and will only result in more blocks. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:49, 20 March 2012 (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 want to be constructive here.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

can i have a chance? to unblock my main account? which is stanbidder1? Mikelimerick (talk) 17:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Already asked and answered immediately above. I've removed talk page access, to prevent any more unproductive requests. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:04, 21 March 2012 (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.