MercuryRising451

Your submission at Articles for creation: Triggo (December 25)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: just an advert?

Theroadislong (talk) 22:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MercuryRising451! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 22:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

this article on toxic and abusive editors is for you. stop harassing others. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/one-third-of-personal-attacks-on-wikipedia-come-from-active-editors/

Speedy deletion nomination of User:MercuryRising451

A tag has been placed on User:MercuryRising451 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 22:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page must not be speedily deleted because... it is an attempt to create valid information entry that exists already in Polish edition of Wikipedia. Attempts at deletion ate mischievous forms of illegal discrimination behavior by some user that has absolutely no reason to furl absolutely baseless allegations. Wikipedia is not a private sandbox for some users to ban and delete valid and congruent with wikipedia goals to create entries in English that match those in other languages. It is AMAZING that people like this can try to destroy wikipedia impartiality and parity of information by BLOCKING entries in English that already exists in other languages. They will not create an entry but BLOCK others from creating one.... how is it even possible...what a joke that is. I am proposing that the user who tried to delete the valid entry is suspended.

December 2020

Hello, I'm Possibly. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Possibly (talk) 22:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

One of your recent edits has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Please do not copy directly from published sources. Possibly (talk) 00:07, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion

ABUSIVE behavior of user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Theroadislong blocking without reason the creation of a valid article in EN wikipedia while same one exists in other languages. No rhyme no reason in VIOLATION of Wikipedia goals and basic principles. illegal forms of discriminatory behavior. Such article exists in other lenaguages and Theroadislong is BLOCKING the creation of it in English. Theroadislong is violating basic principles guiding wikiepdia.

The behavior of User:Theroadislong is not civil and she/he engages in discriminatory illegal retaliatory behaviors by blocking valid articles that are PURELY attempts at incremental TRANSALTIONS of same articles (in this case in Polish). When contests are filed she/he is attempting to block others and their articles based on fraudulent allegations that they are not CIVIL ...just by contesting!!! Those behaviors do not comport with the values of wikipedia. Please cease and desist from employing illegal activities on wikipedia impeding wikipedia goals. It is User:Theroadislong behavior that is not civil, reasonable and it also bears characteristics of illegal conduct. stop blocking articles that are nothing else but intended to provide language equivalents of EXISTING Articles in other languages of wikipedia. wikipedia is not your private sandbox but is to be collaboartively created for everyone- you are obstructing the work of other people by acting in a pathological manner. Go ahead and translate corresponding article into English - but since you are not doing that, stop obstructing others from doing so with your pathological unethical behaviors of throwing spanners in the works for NO REASON AT ALL other than abusive power trips that pathologically seem to make you feel better.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Not understanding the rules and policies here is not a reason to make repeated personal attacks a above. Unless you change tack and start reading the policies and guidelines that have been explained to you, you are more likely to end up blocked than you are to have your articles published. Possibly (talk) 22:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

it is fact based. the article I have been creating is NOTHING more or less but a TRANSLATION of an EXISTING ARTICLE. There is no reason for it to be blocked and impeded. wikipedia is a not a mutual adoration circle and MOBBING people creating articles DETRACTS from its goals and values. Please stop MOBBING users by blocking their articles with your buddy. The article in questions is a direct translation of an existing article in other language versions. Nothing more. Evidently some editors specializing in pottery barns should not edit articles on vehicles. You and User:Theroadislong are engaging in nothing else but mobbing of users. I was trying to create an article that cannot be reasonably rejected as it is a direct TRANSLATION of an existing article. Frankly I do not care...I am not gonna create one...there will not be one.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs)

As has already been mentioned to you, whether an article exists on French or Polish of Italian Wikipedia is of no relevance. Each specific language Wikipedia has its own rules, and the English Wikipedia has the strictest rules. Possibly (talk) 23:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

this has NOTHING to to with fine wikipedia RULES. You are engaged in MOBBING and NATIONAL discriminatory behaviors blocking valid entries. stop using this as an excuse to COVER for your pathological censorship that is in violation of all civilized rules on Wikipedia. You invent new rules as you seem fit to cover for what you both do. It nis plain MOBBING CENSORSHIP AND NATIONAL DISCRIMINATORY TACTIC. Please stop. As a measure of collaborative effort. GO ahead. Create a valid entry for this term as it is missing in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs)

OK thanks for that informative piece of information! Please enjoy the rest of the holidays, wherever you might be. Possibly (talk) 23:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

You are obstructing and MOBBING editors on wikipedia for contributing valid and missing entries. While you do NOTHING else but MOB others some people actually chose to create entries that you block. There is no article/entry on the eubject and you are BLOCKING the creation of it for NO REASON. yOU ARE REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU ARE BLOCKING IT .

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --MercuryRising451 (talk) 23:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

absolutley no reason to delete.

AfC notification: Draft:Triggo has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Triggo. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 23:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Triggo has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Triggo. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 23:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Adding copyrighted material to Draft:Triggo

Please stop doing that. You have been warned above already. If you persist you will likely be blocked from editing. Possibly (talk) 00:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

how about you collaborate, explain, educate and facilitate INSTEAD of THREATENING and MOBBING with blocking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a school, and the editors are not teachers. You have to read and learn the policies on your own. It has already been pointed pointed out to you that it is not acceptable to insult other users (WP:NPA), that articles need reliable sources (WP:RS), and that you cannot copy copyrighted material into articles (WP:COPYVIO). It has also been pointed out to you that it take a longtime to write an article properly and that you should investigate WP:YFA. In my experience it take users at least a week to a month to learn the many things they need to know to write an article. You have been here one day. Finally, please sign your posts. See WP:SIGN. Have a lovely evening.Possibly (talk) 01:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

MercuryRising451: It's a pretty basic concept worldwide that you are not allowed to copy material from one source and use it in another. You can't take music and use it in a film without paying for it, you can't take an image that someone else photographed and use it as your company's logo, etc. See Berne convention. All creative content, even mundane content like advertising copy, is protected by copyright and can only be used if you have express permission to do so. Violating copyright laws and Wikipedia policy on copyright is not tolerated here.

I'll also note that some of your comments on various talk pages are not very consistent with collaborative editing, for instance shaking your fist about "mischievous forms of illegal discrimination" and posting other disproportionately hostile comments. In a collaborative editing project, you're going to encounter people who take issue with the content you've created. If you don't respond well to criticism, or with people providing clarity about how Wikipedia works, then maybe editing at Wikipedia is not your cup of tea. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

pure censorship, total lack of understanding copyright principles of FAIR USE provisions....you are an editor...I have the impression you have no idea what you are editing...the knowledge of the subject matter seems non existent — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Fair use doesn't allow you to indiscriminately copy whole blocks of content verbatim without quoting or without providing proper attribution. I advise you to read WP:NFC. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

THIS IS MY INFORMATION NOT COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL...WHAT ARE YOU DOING !!!!! I CREATED THOSE TEXTS AND I AM THE COPYRIGHT OWNER AND YOU COME DOWN FROM SKIES AND QUESTION THE AUTHOR. I CAN EVEN PROVIDE AN AFFIDAVIT THAT I AM CREATED THE TEXT! MAYBE YOU SHOULD NOT DO ANYTHING WITH WIKIPEDIA WHEN YOU DESTROY PEOPLE WORK. THIS IS MY CONTENT AND I AM THE COPYRIGHT OWNER. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE TERM COPYRIGHT AND COPYRIGHT LAW AT ALL?— Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs)

@MercuryRising451: I think I understand now! You work for Trigo and you wrote the pres release material that you are using in the Wikipedia article? Possibly (talk) 01:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

In this edit, I see a good deal of content that I can find verbatim here. So how is that your information, exactly? To me that looks like unambiguous plagiarism, and a copyright violation. Unless you are claiming to be a rep from slashgear.com. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: if you web search the phrase "We completed work on the pre-production version of Triggo earlier this year, and recently completed our offer" then you will see that most coverage is likely based on pres releases. Possibly (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2020

I am confused what you are now referring to what is in the content RIGHT NOW. I have copyright on all the current content that I see on the wiki NOW. the process is so WHACKED UP that I am amazed there can be any sensible articles there and what you are referring to. I am referring to what I see there now. I have all this information from the web just from googling. I mean...how can you claim it is copyrighted by someone else when I wrote what you see as latest version now. I do not work for triggo but your nonsense accusations are as bizarre like me saying you work for Nikola - it is a personal ATTACK and not aligned with values at wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you are confused. We were talking about content you added in this edit. Of the text on the right-hand-side, a good deal of it comes from slashgear.com, so they presumably would be the copyright holder, and that would make the addition plagiarism and a copyright violation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

you cannot copy the writing of others onto Wikipedia without attribution, except for specific case like the products of the US government.

Please answer the question about your connection to Triggo: do you work there or are you somehow connected? Possibly (talk) 01:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

no connection...I have connection to slashgear - i read their articles when available on the wbe. attribution was in the process of being added for anything that one is due, yet you are running trigger happy and deleting and removing like crazy. and you are particularly illogical, a press release copyright would belong to a company, it would probably never belong to any person anyway. I have copyright on what I personally wrote what there is in wiki now. all else was being still edited but you run around and trigger happy patroznied and remove without asking first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

It would be appreciated if you'd please sign your posts with four tildes, so that your signature and time stamp is appended. Even if attributed, that swath of content would be difficult to justify for inclusion under fair use and the promotional tone wouldn't be appropriate anyway. Also, nobody needs to ask before deleting copyright violations. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

your burden of adjudication is APPROPRIATE? appropriate by what rules? yours? one can include ANY TEXT so long as there is ATTRIBUTION and FAIR USE PROVISIONS are met. I am thinking my journey with wiki was very necessary. based on what I see here and assuming all articles are created this way this is the MOST unreliable source of information on earth. no wonder people laugh at anyone using wikipedia as reference. this is a disaster of a community like in an Orwellian society of 1984. what is in this article now is my copyright. I wrote it. The process is totally broken. let me ask you another question: are you Cyphoidbomb a lawer or in any way connect to any licensed legal profession that you are making these "interesting" claims in your jurisdiction.

Possibly I think you are more confused than me or maybe those vehicles people are plagiarizing slasgear now. Cyphoidbomb clearly pointed out to you that what he/she refers to is from slashgear. can you Possibly disclose your connection to a chinese company called Kandi? How about you patronizing others and edit some articles instead of creating chaos? Just contribute to something that does not involve you acting like attorneys deleting people work where you obviously are confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

@MercuryRising451: This line of questioning borders on bad faith. The editors commenting here are experienced with how Wikipedia works, such as in the areas of copyright and sourcing, and it would be wise for you to listen to their advice. As for your question on my talk page, I will respond here since it is best to keep the discussion centralized, as previously indicated to you. Once the issues with the draft have been resolved, you may resubmit the draft for review by putting {{subst:submit}} at the bottom. This will put it in the queue. In the meantime, as I have pointed out to you already, please do not remove the previous reviewer comments at the top of the draft. If the draft is found to be acceptable, the comments will be removed when the article is moved to the article namespace. Thank you. --Kinu ^t/_c 03:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Signing your posts

You've been asked over and over to please sign your posts. Not doing so is considered disruptive editing. Possibly (talk) 03:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

maybe you should read about harassing others. such attacks by you are considered MOBBING. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/one-third-of-personal-attacks-on-wikipedia-come-from-active-editors/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MercuryRising451 (talk • contribs)

@MercuryRising451:, all editors on Wikipedia are expected to sign their talk page posts. When new editors like yourself forget to do it, we remind them. It is a very simple thing. In order for Wikipedia to work, we all have to collaborate a bit and follow some basic rules. Signing our posts is one of our standard practices, so that it is immediately visible who said what. So please sign your posts. Thanks. Possibly (talk) 03:19, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

MercuryRising451: You keep throwing around the term "mobbing". You posted two irritated help requests in a public forum, you've also posted irritated comments on multiple other users' talk pages, each of which are on other editors' watchlists. No doubt, other editors have seen these posts. So you have invited all this community attention. And while nobody would fault you for not being familiar with Wikipedia editing norms, guidelines, policies, etc., every attempt to educate you about these issues has been met with snippy counter-criticism and hostile, pissy replies, and even with something as simple as signing your posts with four tildes ~~~~ you just refuse to do it. That's baffling. And when multiple people try to communicate that your choices are running afoul of our community standards, rather than acknowledge that you, a brand new editor, might have a bit of a learning curve to deal with, you turn it into a vicitimisation scenario, and call it mobbing. Sorry, but that's not a rational response. If someone from a different culture invites you into their home and asks you to take off your shoes and wash your hands before eating, they're not mobbing you, they're explaining the rules of their culture. So again, please either be a better guest here and drop the battleground mentality, or exercise your right to not edit at Wikipedia and disengage. Nobody's forcing you to be here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:42, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I am not going to comment on this nonsense above. I was about to create a few other articles but I think this self adoration circle can be best described by how toxic the "approving editors" at wikipedia are. Adding more substance to my replies will only meet with retaliation, censorship and aggressive mobbing by a circle by mutual adoration circle of mobbers that claim that those are the rules of the house. That this is a culture of MOBBING andf AGRESSION - I am not the first to witness that: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/one-third-of-personal-attacks-on-wikipedia-come-from-active-editors/ it is a waste of time to even bother contributing to this place. yes, it is not my cup of tea. it is your cup of tea to create such TOXIC environment- no wonder Wikipedia is a source of misinformation, mobbing and culture of abusiveness and fraud. Instead of contributing to the subject matter a bunch of "privileged" mobbers makes the ultimate goal of adding new articles essentially impossible for DAYS. Just say something on their style and you will be censored, warned, attacked and lectured. gangster mentality not collaborative effort focused on articles. quick search on google and a lot can be found on how toxic this culture is: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/one-third-of-personal-attacks-on-wikipedia-come-from-active-editors/ You not only have right but obligation to refrain from interfering if someone told you that you are engaged in mobbing. Maybe someone else can do your job better making some contributions to the subject matters not schooling others on your psychopathic toxic behaviors. Nobody is forxing you to be here either and your toxic behavior of entitlement to mob and lecture on your toxic probably home derived culture is destroying this place. It is amazing that you can freely engage in personal attacks. And nothing happens. You are ENTITLED to engage in personal attacks to the point of forcing platform abandon. This is MOB mentality. MercuryRising451 (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

If this is your response to something as simple as asking you to sign your posts, then it is quite evident that you lack the ability to work in a collaborative environment. I am blocking this account to prevent a further waste of time. We've tried helping you, but if you can't take that for what it's worth, then allowing you to edit here is not a net positive to the project. You said above that "it is a waste of time to even bother contributing to this place," so it appears blocking you does everyone, including you, a favor. --Kinu ^t/_c 16:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Triggo has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Triggo. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 14:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for your obvious inability to work in a collaborative environment and for having a battleground mentality.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Kinu ^t/_c 16:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

MercuryRising451 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

let get new articles moving, retaliation and blocking only proves the point of censorship. I was attacked I retorted. I should have ignored it. WIKIPEDIA is not place do HOLD GRUDGES. Is it?

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 18:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

No one has a grudge against you. However, it has become apparent that allowing you to edit here is becoming a time sink. You've made it clear that you consider being advised by established editors on policies and guidelines, including about simple things such as adding a signature to your posts, as being "attacked" and "mobbing." Others have tried helping you, but it seems to be for naught when your response to everything is to play the victim. Your unblock request makes it seem like you still don't see an issue with your behavior, and that you will continue to blame others instead of simply taking a step back and listening to what others are telling you. I advise you to read WP:NOTTHEM and WP:AGF if you plan on having your editing privileges restored. --Kinu ^t/_c 17:07, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Triggo has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Triggo. Thanks! CNMall41 (talk) 19:54, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Triggo

Hello, MercuryRising451. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Triggo, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)