Block based programmer

License tagging for Image:AS-projects.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AS-projects.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Inflatable Icons

A tag has been placed on Inflatable Icons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. frogger3140 (talk) 19:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page, just to say that it's at User:Dragentsheets/Inflatable Icons for you :) Alex Muller 21:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Article restoration

I've had no reply from the administrator who originally deleted the article, so if you want you can go to User:Dragentsheets/Inflatable Icons, hit the "move" button at the top and enter just Inflatable Icons to put it back where it was. If there are any issues, he can take them up at a later date. Hope this helps, Alex Muller 17:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Antiobjects DRV

The old article is now userified to User:Dragentsheets/Antiobjects, ready for you to work on it. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Alexander Repenning.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Alexander Repenning.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:AS-projects.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of X-expression

The article X-expression has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable data format. Described in a paper published at the ACM International Lisp Conference, but that paper has only five citations on GScholar, two of which are self-citations by the authors and none of which are in turn major publications.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 09:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Redlobster-icon-inflated.jpg

The file File:Redlobster-icon-inflated.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

orphaned with unclear usability on project

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 12:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Redlobster-icon.png

The file File:Redlobster-icon.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

orphaned with unclear usability on project

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 12:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Agentsheets IDE.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Agentsheets IDE.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 15:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:AS-projects.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:AS-projects.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 15:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Dragentsheets. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. IceWelder [✉] 12:27, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Alexander Repenning. Thank you. Chlod (say hi!) 13:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of name and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions other than promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

• Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
• Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
• Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. Orange Mike | Talk 18:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

April 23 2021

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I would be happy to change my user name if that is your problem. I am an academic working for a non-profit educational organization. Wikipedia has become a truly hostile place for academics. Just tell me what you want me to do. I am an expert on Computational Thinking. The quality of some of the articles related to Computational Thinking in Wikipedia is becoming quite alarming. Why would Wikipedia be more concerned about the name of users rather than the quality of articles? I have never pushed ideas that were not backed up by peer reviewed academic articles

Decline reason:

Please follow the instructions in the block notice to make an unblock request that simultaneously proposes a new username(the first template described, not the second that you used here). Your username is only one aspect of the block. Please review conflict of interest and explain how your future edits will be consistent with that policy. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 23 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.

Your email

I find it really confusing why you are insisting on removing information from the Computational Thinking Wikipedia page. The quality of the article as a whole is quite low. I am an expert in the field. What is the increasing hostility towards researchers all about? Should not the quality of articles front the center?

I find your recent message off-putting. The "computational thinking" article's quality is indeed quite low. However, convoluting it further with "yet another characterization" (which you apparently only added for being your own research, be it peer-reviewed or not) does not help the quality at all. Your edits have revolved solely around promoting yourself, your software, and your research; they did not aim to build a more comprehensive and neutral encyclopedia. You never attempted to fix the "computational thinking" article as a whole, nor have you engaged in any kind of discussion to do so. Your warring over said content is clearly not productive either. Accusing me of "hostility towards researchers" for challenging your various guideline violations is preposterous. IceWelder [✉] 10:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Respectfully, I disagree and find your actions off-putting. If you subscribe to Wikipedia:Relationships_with_academic_editors you would not just delete content but engage authors in a discussion. You're suggesting to get help from Wikipedia editors knowledgable in the topic. If you are knowledgable in the topic please help me. If you are not, how would you know if my contribution adds to the overall quality or not? I have edited the article many times as a whole only to see my contributions getting fragmented again by others. This is a tedious process that has not added up to quality article. It takes at least two to engage in warring. Maybe you could look at the model outlined in the characterization. You should notice that this is a 1:1 alignment to the seminal Wing paper.Feel free to make this connection more explicit if you want. Thank you for your support. User talk:Dragentsheets, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I, first and foremost, adhered to the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Following this first revert, there would have been ample time for you to discuss. I initially did not start a discussion since the edits were several years old and I was not expecting a response—though hoping that you would initiate one if you are still active on the platform (which, of course, has not happened). However, you decided to force your changes back into the article (three times) without discussion, thereby initiating the "edit war". I have been with Wikipedia long enough and have sufficient general knowledge in computer science that I can identify potentially unhelpful content, even without in-depth knowledge of this particular topic. After all, articles are meant for people with rather little knowledge. Wikipedia:Relationships with academic editors (which is an essay, not a policy) actually suggests that "edits that breach policy should be reverted". Now that we are already at this stage, please arrive at point #10 of the "How can we solve it?" section in the essay: ask for help. The Wikipedia:Teahouse is a good resource for that. IceWelder [✉] 08:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Deleting first and then discuss is like shooting first to ask questions later. This is not what the guidelines for academic contributions suggest. But never mind. You suggested a step for asking for help. Remember, I did ask you for help. If you feel you can't help me because you lack "the in-depth knowledge of this particular topic" then why did you feel sufficiently confident to just erase text and an image which demonstrably proved useful to "people with rather little knowledge" such as teachers? If, on the other hand, you feel that you do have sufficient knowledge, why don't you help me? User:block based programmer 29 April 2021.

Deleting first and discussing later is what the policy of the "BOLD, revert, discuss cycle" asks to be done. The essay on academic interaction does not refute this. You should ask for help from an uninvolved editor for as unbiased and productive a work environment as possible. Since I doubt that further interaction between us would bear any fruit, and given that the article currently sits at status quo, I will withdraw my immediate involvement in this issue. IceWelder [✉] 13:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Unblock Request

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am not receiving any compensation for my contributions. I work for non-profit educational organizations; I was blocked 1) because of my user name is resembling a product name. I am happy to change the name. 2) because making contributions that some took for a perceived COI. I am happy to follow Wikipedia guidelines and to back up future contributions with additional 3rd party reference materials. I plan to make future contributions to the fields of programming for kids and computational thinking

Decline reason:

Decline as stale only; you may make a new request should you wish to respond to the comments below. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 3 September 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.

What would you say to the suggestion of a topic ban from AgentSheets as a condition for an unblock? A topic ban (please read before saying yes) would mean you just stay away from that topic completely, in every article, talk page, etc. (i.e. not just the actual article AgentSheets) That would go a long way towards convincing us that you intend to stay far away from an actual, or perceived, conflict of interest. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

globally renamed Dragentsheets to Block based programmer

globally renamed Dragentsheets to Block based programmer . Per user request --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2021 (UTC)