User talk:Friend505/Archive 2

August 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}.  —valereee (talk) 12:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Friend, take this time to reread the advice you've received here. Really READ it, rather than simply thinking about what you want to do next. —valereee (talk) 12:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC) UPDATE: And a warning: if you ping anyone here without their express permission, I'll remove talk page access. —valereee (talk) 12:59, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I've read the given advice very carefully. I promise I will only contribute in the mainspace. However, Valereee, I don't think that blocking me for one week—one week, that's a really long time, I guess I only need an hour to correct my behavior if you do give me the opportunity— is appropriate. I know you have given me opportunites to correct my behavior before, but I was just suggesting to you things that might need to processed. I didn't directly go to the administrator's noticeboard to report the potential sockpuppetry and potential user impersonation; I just notified you, and I was actually helping, or at least trying to help. Please unblock me so that I can become a good Wikipedia mainspace contributor. P.S. Note that I have not pinged you, Valereee, here because of your block explanation. Thank you. Friend505 14:09, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the accidental edit summary for the previous edit; I accidentally wrote "Replying to Valereee's unblock", but I meant "Replying to Valereee's block". Thank you. Friend505 14:10, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Now that I've already read it (as specified by my first post in this section), I have already made up my mind of what to do next. The next thing I'm going to do after I am unblocked or after my block has expired is that I will start contributing to Wikipedia in a good way by improving articles. I'll sign up for the MediaWiki newsletter so that it will give me suggestions on articles that need to be improved, and I will do so. Please unblock me to allow me to improve myself. Thank you. Friend505 14:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Finally, haven't you noticed that I've spruced up the article Duncan Angove a bit? It is now better, and I have added the stub template tag so that it is tagged as a stub. I just wanted to rescue the article since it had been nominated for deletion. Plus, my edit probably caused User:Captain Calm to make the article even better. The user changed the general stub to business-bio-stub, which I didn't know about. Thank you. Friend505 14:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Valereee: Hi, Valereee! Please take a look at the reasons I have listed for unblocking me above. P.S. Please do not revoke my own talk page access for this since I have not violated what you said: "UPDATE: And a warning: if you ping anyone here without their express permission, I'll remove talk page access." You have expressly allowed me permission to ping you in all of the times that I have been blocked. P.P.S. I originally didn't want to ping you, but after noticing that you weren't responding, I decided to ping you. I didn't want to make too many unblock template requests, since that could also lead to my talk page access being revoked. Thank you. Friend505 18:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for This is not a game. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  —valereee (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Question

@Valereee: Hi, Valereee! I would like to ask you why I have not become an extended confirmed user. I've already got more than 500 edits, and I've already been here for more than 30 days, so why am I not updated to extended confirmed? I do admit that I really don't have enough mainspace edits for that, but I promise I will make good-faith edits to the extended-confirmed protected article Donald Trump. P.S. Please do not block me for pinging you, sine this is the only way I can contact you without going onto your talk page. Thanks! Friend505 23:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}.  —valereee (talk) 00:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm an idiot. It's a troll. Oh, well. —valereee (talk) 00:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(sigh). Let me just make one last note before I leave Wikipedia: I am not a troll. I am going to leave Wikipedia; I have some important projects to do outside of Wikipedia, but my Wikipediholicism makes me unable to get away from Wikipedia. I have repeatedly tried to make good-faith edits on Wikipedia, and I was just asking a question. It's okay; I'll forgive all of your previous blocks and this block. Your indefinite block, which is giving me no hope now, might be able to let me finally get enough time to start focusing on working on that project. I have added the retired template to my talk page, but not to my user page, since I cannot do that. If you could allow me to edit my own user page just to add the retired template, I would greatly appreciate it. Friend505 11:07, 28 August 2020 (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).

Friend505 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hi, Valereee! I was just asking a question. I guess the extended confirmed permission hadn't been applied immediately. I'm sorry. I should have waited and not directly ping you. I promise I will only ping you for very important things or questions, as specified by the reply that you made and then deleted. My mind still boggles on why you classify this as "trolling" and "because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia." I am here to help contribute to Wikipedia; you just don't give me the sufficient chance. Last time, you blocked me for a week and revoked talk page access. I could have made a lot of noteworthy contributions during that period if you hadn't blocked me for that long. After seeing the advice of others on speedy deletion, I already understood what I should have done. I beg you, please, just give me another chance. I will make good contributions to Wikipedia articles, including the Donald Trump article now that I'm extended confirmed. I'm really not a troll. I don't want to disrupt Wikipedia; the only reason I created an account here on Wikipedia was because I wanted to help Wikipedia. I actually (I know this seems strange, but please take a look at this) really looked at some of the Wikipedia policy pages, such as about vandalism and sockpuppetry. I think this gave me the foundation of wanting to create an account. Thanks in advance. Friend505 11:06, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I do not necessarily think you are a troll, but I think you are a net negative to the encyclopaedia. Basically, the good you do is massively outweighed by the disruption you cause. Consequently, this block is warranted. I suggest you take some time away from Wikipedia. Salvio 11:43, 31 August 2020 (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.

By the way, I have already completed that important project outside of my wiki-life. Thank you. Also, I need to work on Draft:Southern Song. I have copied its contents to my personal sandbox and am working on it here in my own sandbox, so that if I make any mistakes, it won't cause a big problem. When I finish, I will then place its contents in the current draft and then instigate a discussion on the talk page of the main article, Song dynasty, since the reviewer of the draft specified that once someone thinks that the draft is OK, then they need to discuss it on the main article's talk page. Thank you. Friend505 11:07, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Salvio giuliano: Hi, Salvio! I understand my current situation and that I have made disruptive edits, but if you give me a chance, I will be able to make the good contributions that I will make outweigh my previous disruptions. I already understand what you mean when you talk about my disruptions; you previously gave me some diffs about it. I want to build up my reputation with good edits, so please give me a chance. I really never intended to make such disruptive edits. Plus, look, after Valereee's unblock of her own 31-hour block, I did not make any disruptive edits (at least from my point of view). I think I was just not competent enough, and I was talking with Valereee about stuff that I shouldn't consider about right now such as sockpuppetry and potential user impersonation. I promise I will contribute to articles in good edits. Thanks in advance. P.S. Thanks for believing that I'm not a troll. I seemingly cannot get along with Valereee. If you give me a chance, I can prove to Valereee that I'm not a troll, and that I can and want to become a good Wikipedia contributor. Thanks for your understanding. Friend505 12:07, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

P.S. Actually, in my unblock request, I meant that I had already read the guidelines about vandalism and sockpuppetry before I had created an account. Friend505 12:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, I need to address the fact that information added by a sockpuppet of Xayahrainie43 keeps being re-instated on the article letter frequency. I don't know if the IPs that are re-instating the information are Xayahrainie43 sockpuppets themselves. I would like to instigate a discussion on the article's talk page to solve this problem, since I don't want to constitute an edit war, although I've only made two reverts and both reverts had a gap of 11 days. I don't want to violate 3RR. I do know that 3RR states that no more than three reverts of a single edit can be performed within 24 hours, but I think that if I just keep reverting these edits, it won't solve the problem. I think I need to instigate a discussion on the article's talk page and see what other editors think about this. Thank you. Friend505 12:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Valereee: By the way, Valereee, I think you're a bit ironic. You first replied to me in a nice attitude—I do admit that I am extended-confirmed; the software probably simply needed to take a bit of time to update my rights—then, you indefinitely blocked me for "not being here to build an encyclopedia". Finally, you removed your reply. I think I no longer can get along with you; I think you should let another administrator such as MelanieN to monitor me. You're getting more and more strict; I admit it was my mistake and I should have waited a bit longer to see if it would update, but that didn't mean you needed to indeff me. Your nice reply was great, actually. I don't understand why you would want to indeff me and remove your nice reply. I'm not a troll, and I am here to help improve the encyclopedia. You just don't give me the chance to do so; even Salvio understands that I'm not a troll. I promise I will become a competent Wikipedian and make good edits to Wikipedia; please just give me a chance. I do admit that I have made a number of disruptive edits, but I can outweigh my disruptive effects with lots of good edits, and I promise I will no longer make edits that may be classified as disruptive. I will also only ping you if there is something important that I need to talk with you. Thank you. P.S. Please don't revoke my talk page access, since I haven't done anything wrong with this post. Thank you. Friend505 18:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Friend, the reason I finally decided you had to be a troll was because you said you want to edit Donald Trump. That is an absolutely terrible idea, so bad that it hardly seems possible you could have come up with it unless you were trying to come up with one of the worst places possible for you to edit. It's possibly the most contentious article in American politics, which is a famously contentious area, and you're an editor who needs to stay far, far away from contentious articles until you have a much better idea what you're doing. If you wander into Donald Trump, I can just about guarantee you'll end up indefinitely blocked within hours. At any rate, it's what sealed the case for me. It's either jaw-droppingly bad judgement or you're just winding us up. I really can't think of any other explanation.

I think it's possible you just need some time to mature; maybe come back in six months. If you want to ping me again in six months, that's fine, but I'll ask you not to ping me again until March. I'm reading here. If I see anything I want to respond to, I will.

FWIW I have no objection to any other admin unblocking this editor if they think they can make a dent here. —valereee (talk) 19:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

A more likely scenario will be "Goodbye talk page access, hello rest of Internet"... ——Serial 19:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, Valereee. Thanks for the friendly advice, and I really didn't know that Donald Trump was a horrible place to edit when I'm only 37 days old on Wikipedia. However, I really don't think I need 6 months time to mature. 6 months wouldn't do any good when I already know at least partially what I should and shouldn't do on Wikipedia. If you don't give me a chance, these 6 months that I could've used to make great contributions to Wikipedia would be wasted. If you do give me a chance, these 6 months will not be wasted since I will be able to make good contributions to Wikipedia. Please give me a chance. Thanks in advance. By the way, @Serial Number 54129: there seems to be no reason to revoke my talk page access. I haven't done anything bad on my talk page. Thank you. I just can't get Wikipedia out of my mind. I'm a Wikipediholic. Thank you. Friend505 19:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

 Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• The amount of time and effort that has gone in to trying to help you be productive in comparison to the time you have spent actually being productive is wholly unbalanced. As you admit you cannot stay away from Wikipedia, and as it is exceedingly unlikely that an adminstrator would unblock at this time, I've revoked your talk page access to prevent more of whatever ↑↑↑ this is. It's exhausting.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:David Lewis Public School

Hello, Friend505. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "David Lewis Public School".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)