Jump to content

User talk:Archiepo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Archieproductions)

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Unbroken Chain (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Archieproductions", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because people might think it's a shared corporate account. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 07:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, this is just the username I've kept since 2016. It's the name of my youtube channel and email. Cheers! -- Archieproductions (User talk:Archieproductions) 14:39 22 May 2022 Archieproductions (talk) 14:39, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, club, organization, company, or website, I have blocked this account from editing. You are welcome to continue editing after you have chosen a new username that complies with Wikipedia's username policy.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable, regardless of the username that you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid or compensated in any way, you must disclose who is paying you to edit here.

Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change of your current account here. The new username that you choose must represent you as an individual person, and it must comply with Wikipedia's username policy.
  • To create a new account with a different username, simply log out of this account and then click here to make a new one.
  • If you prefer to change the username on this account, you may do so by adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page (this page): {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken or in use by another account. You can go here to search and see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is available to be taken.

Please also note that you are permitted to use a username that contains the name of a company or organization if it also identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87", but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company".

Appeals: If your username does not represent a group, organization, website, or other entity described above, and if you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 

Thank you. TheSandDoctor Talk 04:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

My name isn't meant to represent an organization, I just have this username because I use it for gaming too, but if you want it to not sound like an organization, then I can make it more personalized like "archiepoductions" instead of "Archieproductions". Thank you for understanding.

Decline reason:

None of those would be appropriate, I'm afraid. I'll note also that there is a company named Archie Productions (as well as Archy Productions). You need to pick a new name that adheres to WP:USERNAME, one that does not sound like it belongs to a company. Yamla (talk) 16:47, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock-un|archiepo|reason= Hello, I would like to change my username. I suppose I could use my secondary gaming name. Hopefully this isn't related to any company. Cheers! 13:41, 27 September 2023 (UTC)}}

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

Hello, I would like to change my username. I suppose I could use my secondary gaming name. Hopefully this isn't related to any company. Cheers! 13:41, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I have renamed your account from Archieproductions to Archiepo, and I will now unblock the account. You can log in using the new username, and the same password as before. JBW (talk) 20:58, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, much appreciated. Archiepo (talk) 03:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand of Austria

[edit]

TV Tropes is surely an amazing site, but as a wiki, it is not a valid source. Baal Nautes (talk) 00:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have updated it. Archiepo (talk) 03:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, regarding your wikipedia edit of cardinal infante i want to know what is the page of the citation (De Aedo Y Gallart) that claims infante was never heavily invested into religion Skibidi36 (talk) 19:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As much as it hurts me to respond to someone named Skibidi36, I'm gonna go ahead and give an answer, whether you're a troll account or not. From the biography of the Cardinal-Infante, not much is known or quite frankly mentioned about his religious zeal. He was given the role of Cardinal at the age of 10. Some believe Felipe III did so because of tradition whilst other believe Felipe III did it due to political opposition; and so that tells us that A: he had no say, and B: the motivation for this decision made by his father could have been based on multiple things that may or may have not been based around his own son. The Cardinal-Infante liked to go hunting from a young age and developed a liking for the musket. His career really only started when he was made governor of Cataluña (where he was essentially trained), which he would quit in 1633 to become the governor of the Spanish Netherlands. As of now, I'm currently doing more research on his early life as well, so I will most likely make some future edits expanding on this topic.
Now, regarding your edits, I have explained the correct procedure in the edit I made. Best of luck! Archiepo (talk) 08:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

[edit]

Information icon Hi Archiepo! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Swedish intervention in the Thirty Years' War that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. See also MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE and stop calling people trolls for reverting your edits that go against established standards. TylerBurden (talk) 11:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TylerBurden. You reverted the same edit last time when I added Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand and Count Leganes to the infobox. Then you did it again this time around. For some reason I had expected you to be educated on the topic of the article considering I've seen you make multiple edits on it but I suppose I was wrong. The edit I made did not change the meaning of the article. It was the correction of a mistake in which the Spanish commanders who achieved victory at the Battle of Nördlingen (1634) and effectively rendered the Swedish army non-existant were for some reason not in the list of commanders? Nonetheless I suppose there was some confusion as you may have not been familiar with the topic. I hope I've now cleared some of the confusion for you!
Cheers! Archiepo (talk) 17:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Archiepo! You are right that your edit was factually correct. But TylerBurden was also right that the way you implemented it was against Wikipedia standards. It was certainly not a "minor edit". Any addition of content changes the meaning of the article, by definition. And in addition, to quote MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE: "the purpose of an infobox: to summarize—and not supplant" — the information should first appear in the body of the article to give the reader an idea who the Cardinal-Infante and Leganés were and when and how they took action. I've added it for you because it should really appear there, but unfortunately the author(s) of the article seemed to have lost interest after their probable idol Gustavus Adolphus died. Palastwache (talk) 20:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, much appreciated! Archiepo (talk) 02:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.
Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
Drmies (talk) 23:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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).

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

Request reason:

I appeal for clemency. I acknowledge that what I did was wrong. At the time of creating the accounts, I did not know that it was against the guidelines, though now I clearly see where I am at fault. This action won't be repeated again as I am aware of the guidelines and will follow them accordingly to avoid future mistakes like this. I will also agree to the conditions of terminating the violating accounts as I know they are not legitimate to the guidelines either.

Decline reason:

Oh, come on now. You didn't have to know it was against policy (not just guidelines) to know it was morally wrong to falsely claim to be multiple different people to support your position. Frankly, you've worked hard to demonstrate you can't be trusted. The best way for you to earn back that trust is to go six months with no further edits, then apply under the terms given at WP:SO. At that point, you'll need to directly address your dishonesty and explain why we can now (at least six months from now) trust you to be honest going forward. It is hard to earn back the community's trust after pulling a stunt like this. Yamla (talk) 09:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Proposed deletion of Siege of Hirson

[edit]

Hello, Archiepo

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Dclemens1971, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Siege of Hirson, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

  1. Edit the page
  2. Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
  3. Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dclemens1971}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Le Catelet (1636)

[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you created or have recently made significant changes to, Siege of Le Catelet (1636), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for pages, so it has been blanked and redirected to Crossing of the Somme. Three typical reasons for this are that: (1) the article's subject appears to fail our notability guidelines; (2) the article is unsourced; or (3) the sources used in the article are unreliable. The page's history is preserved and it is possible to restore the article: If you believe that this page should remain included on Wikipedia or that this action was taken in error, then you may revert the edit that blanked and redirected the page.

Wikipedia:Your first article has more information about creating articles, and you may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Capture of Schenkenschans

[edit]

Hello, Archiepo

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Dclemens1971, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've proposed an article that you started, Capture of Schenkenschans, for deletion because it meets one or more of our deletion criteria, and I don't think that it is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. The particular issue can be found in the notice that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to contest the deletion:

  1. Edit the page
  2. Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
  3. Click the Publish changes button.

If you object to the article's deletion, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the issues raised in the deletion notice. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Dclemens1971}}. And remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dclemens1971,

I don't know if you are purposely taking advantage of this account, but in case you didn't know, I can no longer edit and I am currently on my 3rd month of no editing (I am working towards 6 months of no editing before I can finally submit an appeal). I don't quite understand the rationale behind deleting/blanking 3 articles but that fact that all of the messages you've sent suggest that I "edit the page" is kind of ironic. In the case that you are inherently taking advantage of this account's limitations, then I hate to be the one to tell you, but you are stooping rather lowly, perhaps the intent behind this action is worse than that of the error I committed which led to my block; though I do not like to jump to conclusions so I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are indeed not taking advantage of this blocked account in order to delete as many articles as you can.

On a side note, you could've contributed to Hirson, Le Catelet, and Schenkenschans; yet you'd rather have these articles regarding historical events which took place during the Cardinal-Infante's intriguing military campaigns be deleted. I am currently slightly swayed towards the belief that there are bad intentions behind this due to your lack of input but like I said, I don't like to jump to conclusions and I am really hoping you could elaborate more on why Hirson was deleted, why Le Catelet was blanked, and why Schenkenschans is about to be deleted. I would really like to hear your reasoning, in which I hope convince me that there aren't bad intentions behind this act.
Archiepo (talk) 06:45, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Archiepo,
This is just a standard template message, it was not intended to taunt you. When you tag a page for deletion using Twinkle or some of the other page curation tools, it is standard practice to post a message like this on the article creator's User talk page. It happens when you tag the article automatically, the editor didn't come here, see that you were blocked and then decided to post this message. I'm sorry if you found it aggravating but it wasn't personal, templates like this get posted frequently throughout the day on this platform.
If you so choose, you can post an unblock request if you acknowledge the reasons for your block and make assurances that these violations won't occur again. Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, which, for some reason, most blocked editors don't read, tells you what you need to do. Liz Read! Talk! 22:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The moderator @Yamla said I have to wait 6 months doing nothing before I can appeal. Shame because now 3 articles which I created for the Franco-Spanish War and 80 Years' War are gone.
Archiepo (talk) 08:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Archiepo&oldid=1240240960"