Gabi Hernandez

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gabi Hernandez

This is not advisable. WP:NOTNOW, for one.

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive608#User Gabi Hernandez, for another.
• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gabi Hernandez/Archive, too ;)

Jack Merridew 21:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely not. Not until she is well versed in wikipedia rules. I've been editing here for 3 years, and I still won't apply for administrator status. She is too inexperienced to function as an administrator. Applying for one so soon should show her lack of familiarity with the policies and procedures of wikipedia. Rm994 (talk) 23:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Sources

You still obviously do not understand the concept of citing sources. No where in the source you cited was there any HINT of a mention of a child between Adrienne or Justin, or that he was a playboy. You cannot just write whatever you want, and then cite any random source. Adding unsourced speculation is grounds to be blocked from editing. Rm994 (talk) 18:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gabi Hernandez

Hi Gabi Hernandez. I noticed you created a Requests for Adminship page some time ago; I was wondering as to what the status of that request might be. I think it's fair to warn you that new users are rarely successful at RfA and that the Wikipedia editing community sets very high standards for editors running for adminship. That being said, I strongly urge you to read WP:GRFA, User:Davidwr/Administration is not for new users, and WP:NOTNOW, and ask you to reconsider whether you really do wish to go through with your candidacy; please understand that you stand very little to no chance of passing RfA at this point and that you are strongly discouraged from running for adminship. If you are still intent on running for adminship with that RfA and are absolutely positive this is what you want, please do let me know; otherwise, I'll go ahead and delete the RfA page for you in about a week or so from today. Regards, FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 04:13, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Rm994 (talk) 01:30, 4 May 2010 (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 may also click on the signature button 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. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

ANI discussion and block

I have blocked your account for one week. As you know, your editing on Wikipedia is being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Gabi_Hernandez. Please post here any contributions you have to that discussion and I or another editor will copy them to that page for you. As I said there, my biggest concern is putting fair use images of characters in the articles about the actors playing them. That's been explained to you numerous times, and yet you persist in doing it. I don't get it. Can you explain to me what's going on there?--Chaser (talk) 05:15, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

By the way, you can still edit your talk page while blocked.--Chaser (talk) 14:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Nancyhughes.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Nancyhughes.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey (talk) 11:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cori.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cori.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Liz Lee.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Liz Lee.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Joseph-mascolo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Joseph-mascolo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:AdrienneKiriakis.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:AdrienneKiriakis.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 05:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Maggiehorton.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Maggiehorton.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MHorton.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MHorton.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kate-roberts-photo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kate-roberts-photo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Days of our Lives

I undid your removal of the GA request template. I don't think it matters that the article was passed as GA yesterday; it still does not meet the GA criteria. Note that the editor who placed the template said that "GA reevaluation [is needed, article is undercited", and the comments at the featured article candidacy indicated that the article may not meet GA standards. Please try to address these problems or at least discuss them with the editor who put it their first before removing the template. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kristian Alfonso.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kristian Alfonso.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Will horton.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Will horton.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:32, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Julieolson.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Julieolson.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AdrienneKiriakis.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AdrienneKiriakis.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Stephanie Johnson

Someone pointed out to me earlier that you'd restored this article, voiding the AfD result. I see that you'd added an additional source; however, that appears to be a primary source, which wouldn't be an indication of notability. I've reverted the article to the redirect, and would encourage you to take the matter to WP:DRV, as a previous user had requested, if you would like to overturn the AfD result. Shimeru 00:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I see we've crossed messages. I'll open the discussion if you would like, yes. Shimeru 01:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Stephanie Johnson

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Stephanie Johnson. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Shimeru 01:15, 11 June 2010 (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 may also click on the signature button 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. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Maggie Horton GA review

Hello, I'm afraid I have some concerns about your GA review of Maggie Horton. I don't think that the article meets the GA criteria and will be taking it to be reassessed. In the mean time, I listed some links at Talk:Maggie Horton that are being used as sources, I'm not sure how many of them are reliable, so if you could tell me there if you think any of them are, that would be helpful. Thankyou, --BelovedFreak 13:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Melanie Layton

As I have discussed with you MANY times before, Melanie Layton does NOT meet WP:NOTE. Do not continue to re-create the article. Rm994 (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

As usual, you do not have a concept on notability. There is absolutely NO need to put this up for discussion, because if you look, it has ALREADY BEEN DELETED several times because it is not notable. Your sources are absolutely trivial minor sources that would NEVER hold up in a notability debate. Again, for at least the 5th time, in order for an article to be notable on here, it must have reliable THIRD PARTY sources..NOT sites affiliated with soap operas. All the sources on that article (and most other characters) are minor. Help improve the article by finding THIRD PARTY sources so we can help estabilish notability. Rm994 (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Maggie Horton GA reassessment

Maggie Horton has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--BelovedFreak 01:12, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ShawnChristian.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ShawnChristian.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:39, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gabi Hernandez for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. BelovedFreak 23:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request of Gabi Hernandez

Hello Gabi Hernandez. Gabi Hernandez (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Gabi Hernandez (talk) 20:16, 16 June 2010 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

To be honest, I know what I did was extremely wrong. However, I have done nothing but better these articles. All I seek to do is improve, and I could show you a list of improvements I have made. I just wanted a fresh start, and look how far I have improved most of the articles for Days of our Lives. I have come far, and my goal for completing them was not that far away. Please don't block me, keep Sami blocked but let me have this account to better the articles here. Please, I like it here. It means a lot that I HAVE made a difference. You can ask different user who I have interacted with. I have made a significant improvement. Please. I love it here. Also, if the community decides to unblock me I will NEVER deny the rules, EVER again. User:Sami50421 can stay blocked! I just want this account to remain active. I truly know I was wrong, but all I wanted was a fresh start. Please I'm begging. You can closely monitor my edits to make sure I am never corruptive again. I promise you, my only goal is to get all of the Days of our Lives articles up to standards. The fact of the matter is I know what I did wrong, and will never do so again. PLEASE. Gabriela Hernandez 20:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC))

Decline reason:

This is not your first time using WP:SOCKs. You cannot WP:CLEANSTART while still using both accounts at the same time. Your only possible chance to return would be according to WP:OFFER, but if you even edit anonymously during that time, you will never be unblocked. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:50, 16 June 2010 (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.

Help

As one final piece of advice to you, I am posting this several places so you will read it. Not to be unkind, but it is time for you to move on from this site and contribute your talents elsewhere. The community has spoken, we are trying to build an encyclopedia here, and your assistance is no longer desired. Please find something else to do on the internet. You are blocked, which means we do not want you editing, under multiple user names, IPs, whatever. What you are doing is ultimate disruption and as you can see, will NOT be tolerated. Please stop this nonsense and find somewhere else to spend your editing time. It's not personal, but the community has spoken. Good luck to you. Rm994 (talk) 00:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't believe you. Honestly I have put so much time into this site, and this is what I get. I went and personally fixed all the Days of our Lives articles, and you block me. I have followed your rules, and I closely spent long hours looking for sources, correcting problems, fixing over 40 articles! Not even so much as a thank you. If you didn't want me why did you always thank me for helping you out with the Days articles. Quote: "Your work is greatly appreciated here". Where did that editor go? I have learned a lot here, but I don't think it's fair. You have to admit your articles, are in better shape because of me. Because of my work, and my efforts. And this is what I have to show for it. Just thanks, real slap in the face to me. Have a nice life! PS: This bull actually made me cry. I devoted my time to this, and even under the socks all I ever did was GOOD. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 02:45, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you did much good, but you also disrupted this site time and time and time again! "even under the socks all I ever did was GOOD"? Are you really serious? Sockpuppeteering is NOTHING BUT BAD. If you had just followed the rules, the community would have welcomed you, but you DELIBERATELY and admittedly deceived us. You attempted to "trick" us into thinking you were who knows how many different editors, when it was in fact, all along you, making the same mistakes over and over and over again. You did make some good edits, yes, and if you recall, I attempted to defend you in a sockpuppet debate. But I am one editor, with no adminitrative power, and the admins do not want you back. I am sorry if you think that my words were harsh, I am just trying to save you, and us, more time. Why would you keep wanting to contribute to a site when the admins have clearly asked you not to return? Every new username you make will be blocked, and if you continue to edit under IP's, those blocks will get longer and longer. Please, you have many talents, and you did do a lot of good, why not focus them productively instead of on a site where you will continuously be blocked? Has it ever occurred to you that I might know what I'm talking about? How many times have I ever been blocked? oh..never. I write this to you with the best of intentions, not to hurt your feelings or make you feel bad. We would all just like to get back to encyclopedia. Thank you. Rm994 (talk) 03:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I guess all I can say is thanks for being at least a little kinder. I don't know, this has just been really pissing me off. I want to be a writer, and I thought Wikipedia would be my chance to sort of begin that path. Sami was my fresh start, HGraphite was my attempt to help again. I never intended to cause so much damage. It was really never my intention to cause damage, or whatever. But this whole thing just gave me this deep hurtful unappreciative feeling. I really only wanted to help, and like you said I did a lot of good. All I ever wanted was to better some articles here. Look at how much my writing, and editing have grown and developed since you first met me in November. I've worked hard, and a lot of my work has already been reverted by those stupid admins. Whatever screw them, I'm proud of my work. Obviously I have no chance of coming back here, nor do I want to. Too many times have I been left with this deep heart sinking feeling. People here are evil, and that is no joke! I'm only 16, not sure if you knew that. I'm just a kid, and I don't need people screaming at me we'll I tried to fix things. Yes I've screwed up. Yes I've delibratley used socks, but I have never caused extreme vandalism to any articles here. There should be something to show for that. Not sure if you ever knew my real name, but it's Ally. Most likely this will be the last time I talk to you. Get those Days articles up to GA standards. I made an attempt for Maggie, and the Days of our Lives article. Hopefully my work contributed something to this site. Have a very happy life! =) Gabi Hernandez (talk) 04:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Stop

Please stop editing. In case the numerous blocks didn't alert you, your contributions are not welcome here. When you edit, it is patently obvious it is you. It takes less than a minute to rollback a day of your edits, and at this point the futility of you trying to edit undetected should be obvious. Cut it out and move on to something else. I'm sure they could use your help at the Days of our Lives wikia, because we do not need it here. AniMate 21:17, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I hope you know that I am not a robot, and that does actually hurt my feelings. I've become somewhat of an addict to this site, and it's hard for me to just not use it. I'm trying though, so could you stop and not be so god damn snarky to me. Yeah, you've made a point your the biggest thing around, but it doesn't mean your better than everybody else. Get over yourself. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 04:40, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

That goes for User:Belovedfreak, and User:Bali ultimate as well. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 04:45, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, but this has come to an end. To clarify WP:OFFER, you cannot edit at all, anonymously or otherwise, for 6 months. You do seem quite eager, and the days wikia would probably benefit from your expertise. You can import articles from here and make your changes without interference. AniMate 02:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Why do you keep removing a bunch of images from a lot of articles I have contributed too. Some of them aren't used as merely decorative images. Some of them are needed to represent a different view point or a different portrayer. I don't see how they count as decorative images. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 05:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm removing them because they fail our non-free content criteria. Per Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy_2:

3a: Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information.

The images multiple images don't convey significantly different information, they're just fan-siteish.

8:Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.

The images do nothing to significantly increase readers understanding of the topics, and thus I've removed them. AniMate 06:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:OFFER

Looks like some contributors here have been less than encouraging. If you really want to come back, we have a standard offer. Basically, leave the site for 6 months. Do not edit, and do not sock, even under IPs. You're more than welcome to read all you want; just don't edit. You might also consider reading the policy pages (see Wikipedia:Five Pillars for a start). When your 6 months is up, make a request on this talk page for the standard offer. Note this is not a guarantee, but at this point it's your best bet. N419BH 23:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I really do want to come back. I love this site, and everything about it. I will follow WP:Offer, and not come back for six months. I give you my solid promise. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 23:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

By the way, just to let you know this [1] is not me. I swear, it's not. You can do a checkuser on it. It's not my account. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 05:06, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Understood. I'll make a note of it. By the way, if there are any accounts of yours that we haven't discovered yet, it would help your case if you disclosed them here. It's much better to be upfront than it is to wait for us to find them, if there are any. N419BH 05:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Nope. I swear I have not made any other sock accounts, other than the ones already blocked. I promised you to follow WP:OFFER, and I want back in here so I refuse to be stupid. So if there ARE other soap opera accounts, you can guarantee that there not mine. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Alright. Thank you. I've posted that to WP:ANI so the other editor knows. Keep yourself sock free for 6 months and then we'll have a discussion at ANI about letting you back in. N419BH 05:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I will adheve to the requirements, to be accepted back in. I really mean that, it's not worth putting time into a stupid sock, then being blocked, and having all that hard work reverted. Thanks again. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 05:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Let me be clear, WP:OFFER is not a guarantee. Wikipedia works on consensus, so it will be up to the community at large to decide whether or not you can come back. They might say no, they might say yes, or they might say yes but under restrictions. Nevertheless, this is your best chance to be accepted back. Use it well. N419BH 05:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Ally, or Casey, or Gabi.

I'm pretty sure I'm the first editor here to have noticed you as being seriously disruptive; if not, I was early. I'm a sockpuppet; I was banned for 8 months for abusing multiple accounts and for evading Arbitration Committee restrictions, and I have now returned and am street-legal. So, it is possible to return.

You do need to stop socking. You've said above that you would, and that's a good sign. If you continue after that, your chances of returning are effectively zero. The key to returning is to listen to what you are being told about your approach to the project, and to take at least a fair amount of it aboard. Returning is not just about waiting 6 months, it's about change, about being honest, and about work. When I was banned, I did not go away, I went UP. To a higher level of discussions and wiki-people. I'm an admin on another project and I'll get around to becoming one here. You should try wikia:daysofourlives and do good work over there. You could quickly become an admin there; just ask at wikia:community:Community Central:Adoption requests. Wikia is owned by one of the founders of Wikipedia, Jimbo, and Angela. It is a site designed for what you're really trying to do; their motto is: Collaborate with people who love what you love. I think that if you do this and learn the appropriate balance between that site and this one, and learn to stay within the lines here, you could return next year. There would likely be some sort of restrictions placed on you; mebbe a mentorship with someone (Rm994?).

Your interests and editing patterns are well understood, at this point, and you're easy to spot. By continuing to sock, you're pissing people off because you're making work for them. You're also encouraging a class of editors who just love to play Whac-A-Mole with live targets. None of this is good for you. Please read what everyone has told you and indicate that you really understand and that you'll really stop. This is the only route that's going to work for you.

Sincerely, Jack Merridew 14:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Jack. My name is Ally, and I never knew you were banned or a sock. I have decided not to continue to do so here, because I really do like this site, and I'd like to contribute to a lot of interests that I enjoy. I have made some really good edits here, but some of the actions I took in doing so were very wrong. I'm willing to wait six months, and I'm hoping in that time that none of the articles I have contributed to are drastically changed, or deleted. I hope it's okay if I still keep an eye out here on stuff. I like to know what's going on, but I'm not going to sock anymore. It's a real let down with the whole SPI, and revertion of edits. I spent two days on an article I was working on, but all that hard work got reverted. I can wait until November, and hopefully learning my mistakes, and overcoming them I can be let back in here. I would be willing to be mentored by User:Rm994 as we have been in close contact ever since I came on here. I'm not a bad editor, and I think people see that in my work. I have fixed up most of the Days of our Lives articles, and if I am allowed to come back I will continue to do so. I like it here, a lot. Maybr that's why it hurt so much when I got banned. I have been trying out Wikia, and it's okay but it's not like here. I'll go over there for a few months, and see what I can do. However, I refuse to be stupid about being let back in here. Thanks. =) Gabi Hernandez (talk) 18:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Know that your actions over there will be mentioned when you come back here. So make sure you prove on that site that you understand their rules and abide by them. The key issues I've seen on this site were edit warring, image copyright problems, and article ownership. Read about those topics and make sure you aren't engaging in any of the actions that led to this whole mess on this particular wiki. Good luck, and remember to ask for help if you need it. N419BH 18:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome, Ally. My history is available by clicking on the sock icon on my user page; from there you'll find links that lead to megabytes of stuff. My original account was User:Davenbelle, which was created nearly 6 years ago. I am an old hand here, who has seen an awful lot of things. There are probably only about a hundred active editors who have been here longer than I.

I've not been following the details of your recent socking, but I see that you've done a lot and that this has continued up until mere days ago. The six months mentioned in WP:OFFER starts today, or mebbe a few days ago, which I why I said next year. The idea here is that it's a test of your willingness to abide by the "rulz". Since the rules here are just moar pages that people can edit, the test is really about listening to what the collective 'we' tell you. "N419BH" has indicated the core things that people are saying and I'll give you links: Wikipedia:Edit warring, Wikipedia:Copyright violations/Wikipedia:Non-free content, Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. These are key things you will have to come to understand. You may feel that you have made mostly good edits that 'fixed-up' articles, but there's a pretty strong consensus that you're being a net-negative. That's what has to change, and you need to understand that, too.

When you create an account on Wikia:, you should state, over there, that you are the same person as this account, 'en:wp's User:Gabi Hernandez'. You do not have to use 'User:Gabi Hernandez' on Wikia if you don't want to; up to you. And you should indicate, here, what account you've created on Wikia. This is called 'cross-acknowledgment'. This is just my advice, not a rule, but it is advice that others would give you, too; it was once given to me, by a good friend. This will allow folks considering whatever request you make in six months to review what you've done over there between now and then. If you seem to have done nothing other than sit-out a six month wait, people will still be pretty cautious about allowing a return here.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 21:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

p.s. My name's not 'Jack', it's David; Jack Merridew is a fictional character from Lord of the Flies. It's a joke, really, as I don't see myself as actually like 'Jack', although I see many here who are.

Just a quick not on whoever said I believed in "owning" articles. That is a false statement, because I don't believe that. I must have messed up we'll typing that, or explained it wrong. I never implied ownership to any of these articles, because nobody owns Wiki. I just felt the need to point that out. Anyway, I will create an account on Wikia, the name can be Gabi Hernandez. Gabi is a character from Days of our Lives, and Casey is a character from another soap I enjoy As the World Turns. Since you explained your name to me, I decided to explain mine. So thanks David, hopefully I can be accepted back here, and continue my work. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 21:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, again ;)

That comment was by N419BH, who's a pilot—and I believe that's an aircraft tail number. He was offering his view that you have article ownership issues. It is a concept pretty closely related to edit warring. You should assume good faith that he offered his honest opinion and not dismiss it as a 'false statement'. He's a new editor, only a year and a half ;), and I only encountered him a few months ago. He's speaking earnestly and helpfully here, so don't get defensive, OK? It is great that you understand the non-ownership issue, so let's not dwell on this (which means don't dig your heels in over this point;).

• Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Gabi Hernandez
• Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Gabi Hernandez

It would also be helpful, to you and to all here, if you cleared up the suspected socks, and add any that have been missed; the IPs, too. Are the accounts listed in the 'suspected' category all you? It's possible that there's a Joe job in there; this would be some troll playing the 'dispute enhancement game'. Please disclose all accounts that you have used. I've done this, and it's all about transparency.

When you've created your Wikia account, leave a note here, as I suggested above. And point at this account from there. Wikia has staff and you should hook-up with them and be honest with them; contact: wikia:community:User:Sannse or wikia:community:User:Sarah Manley. They are 'Community Managers' and can guide you as you get up to speed on what's-what on Wikia. You can tell them I suggested this; they know me ;)

Cheers, Jack Merridew 22:04, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to get defensive, just trying to be bold and make that clear. I think that list is missing User:HGraphite, and possibly my library IP adress that I used once. Although, I really don't remember that, so I doubt it's possible to put there. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 22:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

User:HGraphite is in the confirmed category; were [REDACTED] and User:IMissAremid you? Cheers, Jack Merridew 22:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, those were both me. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Terima kasih, Ally, that's helpful (it's Indonesian for 'thank you';). [REDACTED] has not been blocked; someone will, of course. I'm about done for now; I'll look back for a wikia cross-acknowledgment. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 22:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I made a wikia account here, [2] (not sure how to make a direct link to my user page yet}. And another quick question, I can transwiki anything from here onto there right? Basically a copy, and paste it? Or do I have to rewrite it from scratch? Obviously I will work on the Days of our Lives articles, and most of those here I wrote myself. So I was just wondering about that. Anyway thank you so much for being so kind to me. I find myself less angry about being blocked, and more enthusiastic that there's hope of me coming back here. Talk to you soon, David. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 23:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad to see you're taking responsibility and hope you find Wikia enjoyable. To copy information from Wikipedia to Wikia you need to use this template. I believe there is an option to import articles from here as well, but they need to be tagged with the template for proper attribution. AniMate 23:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

This should help you get pages from Wikipedia over to Wikia, but as long as you use the template I'm fairly certain copy and paste works as well. --AniMate 23:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I've left her a note over there and pinged Sarah Manley to lend a hand. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Didn't mean to offend you on article ownership. Some editors have expressed concern regarding it, that's all. Specifically, they've taken issue with statements like "just don't delete them until I get back". Just to be on the safe side, you might want to read the page on it. I can almost guarantee an editor or two will ask you about it when we discuss your return here, so if you read the policy you'll know what the key points are and how to adequately answer any questions on it.

On an unrelated note, Jack has it right. I am a pilot, and N419BH is the tail number of an airplane, though not one that actually exists. Look on my userpage for details. Listen to Jack. He has excellent advice. He even helped me code my signature to give it the nifty colors and border. Most importantly, he's been in much worse than your situation before. He was banned from the English Wikipedia by the arbitration comittee. He's back now because he proved during his ban that he was capable of editing constructively and could be trusted as a valuable contributer to the project. Now he's well on his way to adminship here. He did this by doing exactly what he's advising you to now do. Take care and don't hesitate to ask us questions if you need help. N419BH 23:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

;) Jack Merridew 06:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I second that. You have the makings of a potential great editor. Drop me a line on this page if you need help. I will check it periodically during the waiting period. Good luck to you :) Rm994 (talk) 23:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Rm994. Hopefully, in due time I will be allowed back here. For now, however I will be working on the Days of our Lives articles over on Wikia. If I'm allowed back here, I hope that we can work hard at getting those articles up to GA status, and eventually FA status. I really like it here, and really hope to return. But for that to happen, I need to follow WP:OFFER and not sock. I have worked with you many times, and you have been very encouraging to me, and I hope to eventually earn back that sort of "trust" we had. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Vivian alamain.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Vivian alamain.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:44, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

account cross-acknowledgment

Hi,

Could you please confirm that

• wikia:daysofourlives:User talk:Gabi Hernandez is really you? I've little doubt, but a 'yes' will leave no doubt. (nb: she's already confirmed this connection with the Wikia account;)

Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I confirm that is indeed me. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 06:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Kewl beans; terima kasih. Jack Merridew 07:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey Jack. Thanks for your help on my page, I've been having some difficulty editing the page. I did get promoted to an admin, and a beauracrat. I haven't had a lot of time lately, but I hope to put in some work soon. Thanks. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 16:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

It's "bureaucrat" and since you are one, you should spell it properly. AniMate is right (below), stay off this page for a while or it will get locked on you. Focus on Wikia. After 60 days, you can adopt another soap if you feel you've the time and energy. And don't reply to me here... Jack Merridew 04:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Rm994 on Kimberly Brady

Hey, this message is for User:Rm994. I know I'm banned, but I was wondering if you could look at some work that I put into an article before I was banned. Here is the work I did on Kimberly Brady a few weeks ago, and the editor said if another editor believed the information was worthy from another editor's point of view that the information could be used. I think you should look at what I put into it here [3] and tell me if you think you could revert the information. Right now it's a stub, with few unreliable sources. But in the version here there are more references, and I expanded it. Please consider it, because it could stop the article from being nominated for deletion. And I know a lot of Days articles could be deleted soon. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 03:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Or is Jack could take a look at it, and revert it that would be great. It's good information, and I don't want to see the article deleted. I just hate to see that work wasted. You can say no, I'm just saying it would stop the article from being deleted. I still keep an eye out on some of the articles that I put a lot of work into. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Banning policy#Edits by and on behalf of banned users The answer to your question is no. You're not allowed to edit here. No one is allowed to edit for you. Perhaps it will be for your own good if I block your access to this talk page for a few months so you're no longer tempted to post. I'm not going to do it, yet, but you really need to stay away for a long while. AniMate 04:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi. This is one of the things you need to learn about Wikipedia: it's not a fan site. The stuff you linked to is all plot and story summary, not encyclopaedic coverage from a real world perspective. You like this show, I know. The sort of coverage you've tried to add and wish to remain is the sort of coverage that is more appropriate for Wikia, which is why people have been pointing you there and why they're welcoming you. The two sites have different purposes. Additionally, since you're banned, anyone here making edits on your behalf risks running afoul of the policy on proxying for banned user: Wikipedia:Banning policy#Edits by and on behalf of banned users. You should read the whole Wikipedia:Banning policy.

I saw that you were given admin and bureaucrat right on wikia:daysofourlives; congratulations on that. Be happy and don't focus too much on what happens here. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

(ec; see? what AniMate said;)

(Great minds, Jack.) Also, the Storylines section you added is an awful close paraphrase of the source you cited. Even if you weren't banned, which you are, it would have to be completely rewritten. Sorry. AniMate 04:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I have been staying away, and I have not socked. I simply was wondering if that was possible, and you don't have to remind me that I am blocked. I no longer find myself as tempted to come here, as I used to be. I still want to come back here, so I will follow WP:OFFER. I still like to keep an eye on things though. Becoming an admin and bureaucrat was extremely easy, but I don't like Wikia. It's not the same as here. I also know this is not a fansite, it's Wikipedia not Soap Opera Central.com, or Soap Opera Digest.com. Wikia is not working on articles, it's building an entire website. Your basically creating an entire website about Days of our Lives. I will work on there, but it is more complex than working here. Sorry if I come off as a bit moody, I've been having somewhat of a rough day. Sorry if I was a little snappy. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

If you want help with things on Wikia, find others who can help. I don't know very many people over there, but you might get some help from wikia:list:User:A Nobody. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Jack and AniMate. I (or any other editor) can't edit for you while you are blocked. We run the risk of being blocked ourselves. I know what it's like to be addicted to a site, as I come here everyday myself. Maybe you could try just not visiting the site at all instead of reading it. If you're anything like me, you'll see things that need to be fixed, and possibly be tempted to sock/get someone to edit for you. If you ever want to come back, it's your best bet. Your edits on Wikia will be noticed, so you don't have to give this site so much attention. Don't worry, I will do my best to prevent vandalism to pages, as always. And if Kimberly Brady is nominated for deletion, I will certainly suggest that it be saved. I hope this helps. Good luck. Rm994 (talk) 02:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Nicole Walker/DiMera

Hey Rm994, if your reading this can you tell August August not to move Nicole Walker to Nicole DiMera. That is vandalism, and does not follor WP:COMMONNAMES. As she is more known by Walker, and there is no proof she changed it. And could someone change that back? Sorry I know I'm not supposed to be editing here, but could someone just adress this? Thanks. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 22:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree, yes, it needs to be changed back, and I have followed the necessary channels to get it done, but I must advise you that phrases like "I know I'm not supposed to be editing here" will greatly decrease the chance you'll be able to come back. WP:OFFER is very clear: Leave the site for 6 months. I know you have much to offer here, and I would be more than willing to be a mentor if you are allowed to return. But take my advice, please...just concentrate on Wikia. See what happens? You see something that needs editing and have again asked someone to address it. I realize that in this case, it IS a necessary change, but that doesn't matter. I will continue to monitor vandalism to pages...I assure you, I WOULD have caught that change. And it's not like anything messed up can't be changed when/if you return. Please, don't torture yourself by reading this site daily. It will just tempt you to try to get others to edit for you/sock. Good luck over at Wikia. Rm994 (talk) 03:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I know, and I am truly trying. However, this is my main "go to" site for information. I'm trying to change that trust me. And I have made some very good contributions to the Days Wikia. I would love for you to be my mentor, and I'm glad that your willing too. That's for later on though. Sorry I just wasn't sure if you were aware of that or not. Cheers, Gabi Hernandez (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

We're watching it. There's a tool called Huggle that spots vandalism and other issues. One of the big things about Wikipedia is that the encyclopedia is fluid. It changes and mistakes happen. To use an example from my industry, last week the page on O'Hare International Airport was moved to Chicago O'Hare International Airport, which was incorrect. It was later fixed. If a page is moved incorrectly, it will be noticed and repaired. As a humorous example, a couple years ago someone accidentally deleted the main page. Wikipedia's still here because it was fixed. For additional examples, see Wikipedia:Village stocks. Mess ups happen. So don't worry about issues like an impending incorrect page move. I assure you we'll take care of it while you're away. Have fun on Wikia, and if you do find yourself drawn back here, try reading up on some of the policy pages. You'll find some rather humorous items there, as well as sections on policy. The Five Pillars is probably the most important of these pages. N419BH 05:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Bad formatting

I've removed this request. The formatting you had is completely wrong, you won't show up in requests for unblocking, and the formatting made it impossible to post new comments to your page. I'd be happy to post it properly for you. AniMate 01:14, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Animate, I was having a huge problem with it for some reason. If you would be willing to fix it right I would be very appreciative, thanks! Gabi Hernandez (talk) 01:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

There you go. I'm not going to unblock you myself, but to whoever reviews this I'm neutral on whether the unblock should be accepted or rejected. AniMate 01:19, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

↑↑↑ (edit conflict) As I was about to comment. This request is also premature as the six months in WP:OFFER is up in *January*. You've only 149 edits to wikia:daysofourlives and seem to have lost interest in that. And you've said nothing about the copyvios and other issue you had before... Jack Merridew 01:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

It's not up in January. I was blocked in June. As for the copyvio, are you referring to my early days when I copied and pasted information from a website onto Wikipedia? Gabi Hernandez (talk) 01:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

The latest block of one of your socks was July 6. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 21:20, 7 November 2010 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

In the past six months I have been blocked, I've truly changed as a person. I've matured more, grown more, and learned much more. I have been keeping busy, and became a Bureaucrat/Administrator for the Days of our Lives Wiki on Wikia.com. I'm not asking for forgiveness for anything, and I fully accept everything I have done here involving sock puppets. However, I have truly learned my lesson, and that what I did was wrong. And I promise never to do it again. I haven't socked or edited under an anonymous IP since June. I'm asking to please be accepted back into the Wikipedia community, which I have grown to love. I've grown as an editor, and I think if allowed to do so I could make some really great contributions here.

Decline reason:

I'm declining this per the emerging consensus below with which you seem to be in reluctant agreement. If you genuinely do want to help here, spend some time on a sister project (like Simple) and make your case again after Christmas. Until then, I would advise you completely disengage with English Wikipedia and allow the community to forgive and forget. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 7 November 2010 (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.

[4]. T. Canens (talk) 01:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

This should probably by placed on hold pending a community discussion. FWIW, 'Gabi' has emailed me and it includes a promise to never sock again. Last known socking was circa July, as I recall. Jack Merridew 01:28, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I did indeed. If you need to you can post the email on here for the admins to read (not sure if that's necessary?). I also have upheld my promise not to sock anymore since the last time we talked. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 01:31, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Technically, Jack is right here. You as a person were last blocked on July 3. The standard offer's six months starts from that date, though nothing is written in stone. AniMate 01:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Would there still be a chance of me being allowed to be unblocked though? I truly have learned my lesson, and I will never sock again. That is a promise. Also in my absence I've taken time as User:Rm994 suggested and read through more of the guidelines. Specifically WP:NOTE. If allowed to do so, I promise to only make constructive edits that could value Wikipedia. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 01:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

If Gabi is to be unblocked, I'd hope that it would be with certain conditions, to stay away from certain areas for a certain period of time. Eg. to refrain from reviewing GA nominations and from recreating deleted or redirected articles, as these were where problems arose before. I also think a mentor(s) would be a good idea, perhaps someone editing in the general topic area of Gabi's interest. I do think, Gabi, that you're sincere in being sorry for what you did before and wanting to do better, and just get on with editing about the things you're interested in. It's important though for you to understand just how disruptive your actions were before, especially the deception. If you are unblocked, you need to make sure you listen to people if they try to help you out or when things are going wrong. (edit: and perhaps no uploading of fair use images for a while?)--BelovedFreak 01:53, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm still ambivalent about unblocking, but a complete ban on uploading images would also be necessary if she were unblocked... and I'm not certain that would be a good idea. As for a mentor, there simply aren't that many soap opera editors and most of us were pushing for the block. I don't know who would be willing to take her on. AniMate 01:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

What about User:Rm994? He's the one who helped me understand a lot of the basics when I first started here, and we both are interested in editing articles about soap operas. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 01:58, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. If she were unblocked (and I'm equally ambivalent I think) I'd be prepared to keep a general eye on her, but I don't edit soap opera articles and I'm not inclined to put a whole load of articles I'm not interested in on my watchlist, so I might miss things from that point of view. I wouldn't want to be the only one... just putting that out there though.--BelovedFreak 02:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I think a mentor willing to watch all the articles is necessary. The soap opera articles are a hot mess, and need help from someone with a critical eye and not a fan who wants to recap. I've left a note for Rm994. However, the unblock request isn't satisfying for me. Gabi, you weren't blocked just for socking. You were blocked for what those socks did. The GA review of Maggie Horton was horrendous. Your image uploads were worse. The more I reintroduce myself to your editing problems, the less good I feel about this unblock. I don't think waiting until January while you do some real, meaningful work over at Wikia is too much to ask. You could even hop over to the Simple Wikipedia and work to show that you're able to work well within a community that uses the same policies and guidelines we use here. AniMate 02:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Gabi, what happened with Wikia? I'm honestly not saying this to be mean, because I do think you have good intentions, but it kind of seems like a token effort. It could be your chance to show us how you've changed, but you've only got 149 edits, you've uploaded non-free images in the last week. I don't know what the rules at Wikia are, but you're not showing that you understand fair use at all. Also, as I understand it, Wikia's license is compatible with ours, so you could have been doing a whole lot of work on those articles to use here if and when you are unblocked. Their Days of Our Lives article doesn't have any prose content at all. I thought you'd get more into that. I think Simple Wikipedia might be a good idea too. From looking at Wikia, SimpleWP seems more connected to this place and you'd be interacting with some folk that are over here too.--BelovedFreak 02:14, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Also this is from WP:Standard offer:

The six month threshold can be adjustable under special circumstances. If an editor shows an unusually good post-ban track record, such as positive contributions to another Wikimedia Foundation wiki, then a return might be considered sooner.

You've made a handful of edits to Wikia, but you haven't made any meaningful contributions to one of the WMF's projects. You also socked for over a month after your indefinite block. Having thought about this, I oppose an unblock now, but if you want to put this to the community, I'll place the request on hold and take it to WP:AN for you. AniMate 02:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, my edits weren't daily recaps. Before I was blocked, my original goal was to try to fix up all the Days of our Lives articles by adding more valid, reliable sources to them. For example, the GA Review was treachery and wrong. However, I put a lot of work into it. I'm the one that added all those sources. Then you can look at almost every other article on the subject, and see that I was indeed doing good. The image uploads were my fault because I wasn't familiar with image policies. I think a complete ban on that would indeed be necessary until I learn more about them. I would be willing to work under any circumstances given to me. I just think I have seriously grown as an editor, and writer. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 02:19, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you've ever used Wikia before but it's a very complex site to work on. That's the reason I don't use it that much. Plus, it seems to be more like creating a web page rather than editing an article. All of the character articles on there were made by myself, and I used to post news there a lot. However, I would like to still go through with this because I believe I can make some great contributions on here. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 02:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I've used Wikia before, and it's only slightly more complex than Wikipedia. In some ways it less so, because you don't have the oversight you do here. I also know that editing over there can be a little lonely, which is why I think you didn't stick with it. If you were so interested in crafting wonderful articles, you can do that with minimal interference over there. My advice, take some time do some real substantial editing and come back in January. Also, understand that the standard offer is just that: an offer. Not a guarantee. AniMate 02:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm with AniMate; this seems like an impatient request four months into WP:OFFER's six months, and with little actual change except the date. The prior problems were far more extensive than the socking, and we'll be having no more of it. If anyone moves this further, soonish, or January-ish, wrap it an a soap topic-ban and an image upload ban, and re-wrap with a suitable mentor. Jack Merridew 16:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Why would I not be allowed to edit articles about soap operas? That's the only reason I come on here. And I will take AniMate's suggesting and wait..Gabi Hernandez (talk) 18:58, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I started a Simple Wiki page here: simple:Maggie Horton (it's the article I was originally working on before I got banned in June. I intend to work on it over there, and get it up to FA material so that if I am allowed to come back I can nominate it for FA status. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Be aware that the Simple Wikipedia doesn't have featured articles. They have "very good articles". A very good article over there won't be a featured article over here. You'll be writing for people who learned English as a second language. That means no complex sentences and you'll need to use the most basic nouns, pronouns, adjectives, etc. Focus on improving the Simple Wikipedia, don't focus on coming back here. AniMate 21:28, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Because you were the cause of a lot of problems in those areas; problems no one wants to deal with, again. Capish? You know I was en:indef'd. Before I sought to return, I had better than 10,000 edits to other WMF-projects. It isn't about "waiting" until you're allowed to come back, it's about showing that you're useful and making people want you back. Jack Merridew 23:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but articles pertaining to soap operas are the only ones I am interested in editing. What would be the point of me coming back then? And I realize that, and I'm going to update some pages on Wikia tonight if I have time. A new cast photo was just released, and I am going to post the interviews on there. Then I plan on adding more character articles. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 00:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Have you read Wikipedia:Single-purpose account? Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia? You should ;) Jack Merridew 01:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm coming into this late, it looks like it's already been decided. Before a week or so ago, I would have gladly mentored User:Gabi Hernandez. However, it was during that time that it was ever so nicely pointed out to me that I don't know the rules here either. I was told to add "citation needed" quotes to additions that were flat-out vandalism and unsourced speculation. I have been editing here for 3 years and then all of a sudden get attacked. I feel like I have tried VERY hard to keep the soap opera related articles from being nothing but fan site plot updates, but the latest struggle I was involved in was absolutely RIDICULOUS. Basically, anyone can put whatever they want as long as a source exists somewhere? Then what exactly is the point of WP:V? I have slowed down my additions because of getting attacked for removing ridiculous unsourced garbage with no place in an encylopedia. I guess I need to be careful of telling User:Gabi Hernandez to read the rules, because it looks like I don't know them either. Rm994 (talk) 05:20, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I know this has been settled for now, but... I initially suggested the Days Wikia to Gabi a while back because this person seemed pretty dedicated (though I know that Wikia is indeed a lonely site, and is sort of losing popularity). If allowed back at some point, I think that Gabi could be beneficial if Gabi's truly ready to follow the rules. -- James26 (talk) 17:16, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gabi Hernandez

Disappointed, Ally/Casey/Gabi. It doesn't work this way. Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Maggie.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Maggie.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

SPI

...Well...admitting it was the best thing you could have done once you did it.

The best thing you could have done in the first place was not do it at all.

Gabi/Ally/Marcus, you can't do this sort of thing. If you can't follow rules you won't be allowed to edit here. It's that simple. It's pretty clear you're a WP:single-purpose account. You're interested in our coverage of soap operas and nothing else. That is not going to fly here, and actually makes it harder for you to be unblocked. If you hadn't socked, your 6 months would have been up on January 6th, 2011.

Your behavior is obvious. You were caught right after being initially blocked, and you were caught 5 months later. WP:OFFER is in all likelihood off the table, and it is going to be even harder now for you to come back.

For the record, I would be willing to be your mentor should you be unblocked. You're going to have to have a mentor; there is no way now you'll be unblocked without one. As a mentor, my job will be to show you the ropes and keep you out of trouble. That does NOT mean I will defend you from criticism. That means I will point out problems before they become unmanageable. I am willing to do this because I believe you can be a valuable contributor to this encyclopedia, once you learn the rules.

You need to edit in areas other than soap operas. Try hitting the random article button and see what comes up. I edit in aviation related areas, but that's a very broad term. Why don't you broaden your focus to all of television? Maybe help with a few actors and actresses (non-soap opera of course). The other day I edited Assassination, which is nowhere close to my favorite topic.

Have you done any work at Simple English Wikipedia? Doing positive work there will help you get unblocked here. Your block here only affects en.wikipedia.org. You're free to edit elsewhere on the wikipedia domain provided you're not blocked on the sub-domains.

I would refrain from uploading any images of any kind to wikipedia. Your image upload today was not in keeping with policy. Once you're unblocked here I can go over image policy with you. It's highly likely that your unblocking here will include editing restrictions, and one of them is going to be that you can't upload images.

We'll be in touch. Do not sock again. N419BH 05:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

See the very first edit to that page you linked to. By who. Jack Merridew 13:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply

I know. It was incredibly stupid of me, but I just couldn't help myself. I miss this site a lot, and the people here. I'm just hoping I didn't completely knock out any chance of ever returning. However, I know that even if I did it's on my own accord and not on anybody else. I chose to sock again.

As for what you said on me being a single purpose account...it's not necessarily true. I mean of course those are the articles I would be interested in editing, but it's not the only thing I would be willing to edit. Anything pertaining to television, or literature holds my interest. I liked editing soap opera articles because I know their history, and a lot about them. I wouldn't object however in taking a leave from them if necessary.

If allowed back, I would love if you could mentor me. I'm still somewhat new to Wikipedia, and haven't sorted out all the kinks. (Although, I am trying).

I'm going to try to dislodge myself as best I can from Wikipedia. It's hard though because once you're hooked, you're hooked.

Thanks, Gabi Hernandez (talk) 05:47, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a wonderful site and yes, it's very hard to leave once you're in. It's going to be much more difficult now for you to be unblocked, though it's not impossible. I know you don't like wikia, but you should probably go back there and do some more editing...on more than one topic. It's fine to edit soaps, but you need to find another area and edit that too.

Wiktionary might be fun for a while.

We are going to have to see positive contributions to other wikimedia projects if you want to come back here. Your work so far on Wikia seems good, but that was a while ago. Edit deliberately and carefully, and avoid the behaviors that got you into trouble in the first place. N419BH 06:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

ya, it does ↓↓ Jack Merridew 13:19, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think Wikia has a wikia:sixfeetunder Wiki. I could give it a shot, and see where it goes to expand my edits beyond the realm of soap opera's. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 06:41, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikia is fine, but it is much better if you edit under this user name at another Wikimedia project. You made a total of two edits to the Simple English Wikipedia. Why not try actually editing there? Editing at Wikia isn't going to much to prepare you for editing here, since the lack of rules at Wikia isn't going to address the problems you face here, especially serial image violations. The Simple Wikipedia is a great option, because you'll be able to craft articles without having to worry about overly complex sentence structure. It's also a fairly active Wiki, so you'll have some sense of community there, but most importantly you'll have to follow the same rules there you do here. You have made zero effort to show that you're willing to abide by this project's community standards, and until you do, WP:Standard offer is an offer that won't be extended to you. AniMate 07:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Animate. What about WikiNews? I could probably do some good edits there, and it's not lonely. I can try out the Simple Wikipedia of course as well. Gabi Hernandez (talk) 07:55, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikinews would be great too. As long as it's a Wikimedia project and as long as you follow the rules and don't get blocked, your active participation will likely help your case here. AniMate 08:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I (edit conflict)'d with you guys; AniMate is right; you need to stick to Gabi, for now. He's right about Wikia, too; it doesn't really count, here. We can get around to renaming you later, if you really like, but for now, this is your account; the others are naughty socks. WikiNews would work, too, but I know little about it. Simple is kinda looked down on, honestly. I've went there a bit while en:banned, but moved on. Proper links to their main pages are wikinews: and simple:. I have talk pages on both. I'm active on 181 projects. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:08, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for fessing. Got your reply and will reply, shortly. Thanks, too, niner bravo hotel ;) Gabi, Marcus951 will be blocked as soon as some admin happens to get to it. In the meantime, do not edit anything other than User talk:Marcus951 or the SPI with it; here, only use Gabi.

If you like, edit-away on Wikia; that's not a part of the Wikimedia Foundation. Commons and Wikisource are WMF. Before we can talk much about unblocking you here, you need to do some work on one of the other WMF projects.

I think we can work something out over some time. For now, you're en:wp blocked; we're only going to talk here. No editing. No socks.

You've mentioned photography and literature and what I'd like you to do is select a few photographs that you've taken yourself and that you're willing to release on Commons. An example would be another picture like File:Old Indian Meeting House Church in Mashpee MA.jpg, but any nice pictures you've taken that are useful to what WMF does, would work. Something nice, get it? There are several license options: Public domain, which means it's a gift from you to the world, would be best, in my opinion. There are several others that amount to saying "ok, but credit me." Your call, and we should talk before you upload anything. We're going to go clean up any problems with other image uploads you've made on Commons. I've not really looked, yet...

Wikisource is about transcription of documents; things like old books. The current Featured Text is s:The Life of Captain Matthew Flinders, R.N.. Go read some of it. My talk page, there, is at s:User talk:Jack Merridew. Leave me a message, there (and my Commons talk is at Commons:User talk:Jack Merridew).

I'd like to find something for us to work on over on Wikisource. First, a reading assignment: s:The Most Dangerous Game. Please read this; hopefully you know the story, already. If not, some English teacher was remiss. It's a classic story that I believe my mom introduced me to. Anyway, creating proper transcriptions of such public domain books is what Wikisource is all about. The 'source' part refers to the whole of Wikisource being available to Wikipedia as a 'source'. Documents like the US Constitution are there, too. Go look around Wikisource and get a feel for the place. The wiki-link to the main page is s: (links don't get much easier than that, huh?).

All for now; we'll talk.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I find it funny that you brought up this story s:The Most Dangerous Game. We actually just covered the material last month when reviewing short stories. I'm going to have to take a look at Wikisource.

As for the photos...I can definitely do that. I've got a ton of them.

Thanks for all your help, Gabi Hernandez (talk) 08:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm also familiar with WikiNews, so I could do some work there as well. Thanks for your help too AniMate!

Hi Gabi, I just wanted to add my support and say that although I started the recent SPI (and will do again if you pop again soon!), I'm sorry that this is how things have turned out. I'm also glad that you came clean so quickly. You really, really need to listen to people's advice above, it seems like you've got a lot of people trying to help you. Before, it seems like you were just telling us what we wanted to hear. You went away and tried Wikia, made a couple of edits to Simple Wikipedia. all with a view to coming back here. This time you really need to prove that a) you can change your behaviour, and can be trusted, and b) that you have the best interests of the whole project at heart. Usually, anyone can edit here, we're just volunteers, and we do it for fun. People don't have to prove they care about the project. In this case though, I think you do if you want to be accepted back here.

Listen to what people are saying and take their advice. Broaden your interests a little and try to learn the ropes at Simple, Wikinews, Wikisource etc. I like Jack's suggestion of the Commons, it would help you ere if you could show that you know a bit about image use policies (although it's a bit different there than here). They all work a bit differently, so take it slowly and get help where you can. You might find you're enjoying yourself as much as you do here. You need to be patient. It's going to take time; even longer now since you've socked again. Each time that happens, you get rid of any trust that you might have been building up. Try to set yourself some goals, whether it's uploading pictures to Commons that are properly licensed, or writing a good article on Simple, or getting a news article "published" on Wikinews. Some of those are even soap-related! :) Anyway, good luck, and if you need any advice on other projects, I'm quite active under the same name on Simple and Commons, occasionally on Wikinews.--BelovedFreak 10:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

If any of you guys are interested, I started uploading new Commons pics here [5]. These are just a few from a DC trip I took awhile back, and I have much more to come. I'm also working on my first news article for WikiNews, and I noticed Jack created a talk page for me on WikiSource.

Oh, and by the way Beloved...what's the fate of my GA nomination? Will you still let it be copy edited because it's currently in the que? I want to see it succeed and I put a lot of working into it. Gabi H (Talk ^_^) 21:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

A GA nomination by a indefinitely blocked sock-puppeteer isn't going to pass. The hard work you put into was in violation of the rules. AniMate 21:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I know. I was merely wondering if she would allow it to still go through the copy edit because it would really benefit the article as a whole. Gabi H (Talk ^_^) 22:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I did the GA review before the SPI, before I was sure it was you (and because it doesn't hurt to review an article). As you know, it failed and I think it needs quite a bit of work on it, work which obviously you can't do now. If another editor wants to work on it, work on the prose or whatever, of course they can. The peer review is still open. I left a note that the nominator (you) has been indef blocked, so someone may well archive it without reviewing. Perhaps you (AniMate) could advise? Maybe it should just be deleted? I can't see much point in someone spending time & effort reviewing it when there's no one likely to put the work into it, and we're stretched for reviewers as it is. The same goes for copyediting. On the one hand, to copyedit it would improve the article, an therefore Wikipedia as a whole, but with so much other work to be done, copyeditors may be unlikely to choose to work on an article that isn't looking at a GAN or FAC nomination any time soon.--BelovedFreak 22:31, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the peer review page. Gabi, this is my last bit of advice for you. Stop watching Wikipedia for a long while. By all means, participate in other projects, but do so with the understanding of what the aims of the Wikimedia Foundation are. The various encyclopedias are not there to serve as fansites. They are not there to celebrate soap opera characters you like. They are not there for you to impress people with your knowledge of the characters. They are not there for social interaction. They are not there for you to get pats on the back for improving an article about your favorite character. They are not MMORPGs for you to win accolades from. They are not there for you to make friends. They are simply a collection of knowledge. To some degree all of the things I listed to occur, but they should be at the very best secondary concerns. I'm sure you think you know this, but your actions have proven otherwise. Immerse yourself in another project. Immerse yourself passionately, but do so with a dispassionate view of the subjects you are writing about. Think "encyclopedia". Think "online news". Don't think "encyclopedia where I can tell everyone everything I know about Maggie and Marlena and then I'll get a good article and I'll feel good about it yay!". AniMate 07:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll second that. Check your e-mail Gabi. N419BH 07:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

The monkey and the kitten

• http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/gallery/2010/aug/25/bali-animals

You'll like this. A monkey has adopted an abandoned kitten.

• Ubud Monkey Forest
• cf. The Monkey and the Cat

Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

• NOTE: I have suppressed a number of edits to this page. The only thing that I have removed is some personally identifiable information, per policy. You can see it as [REDACTED] above. Nothing else has been changed - Alison ^❤ 08:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that Alison. N419BH 10:03, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Me, too. Terima kasih, Jack Merridew 17:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Return

Given your recent attempts at circumventing your block, and returning to your same behavior (i.e. image violations), it is unlikely that the community will welcome you back. Ever. Just wanted to let you know that people DO watch this site, and your edits are extremely obvious. Thank you. Rm994 (talk) 21:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Disappointed. Jack Merridew 05:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Abigail Deveraux.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Abigail Deveraux.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CrystalChappellNBC2009.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:CrystalChappellNBC2009.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Normal Gwen 7-7-1999024.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Normal Gwen 7-7-1999024.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Zackbrady.jpg

I have tagged File:Zackbrady.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. Melesse (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CassieBrady.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:CassieBrady.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bryan-dattilo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bryan-dattilo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 00:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bo brady.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bo brady.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JustinKiriakis.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JustinKiriakis.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Lois-smith-as-adele-stackhouse 340x463.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Lois-smith-as-adele-stackhouse 340x463.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Janetsnyder.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Janetsnyder.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bo brady.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bo brady.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:RebeccaHotchkiss.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RebeccaHotchkiss.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)