User talk:Atorres50

This account has been blocked indefinitely because CheckUser evidence confirms that the account's owner has abusively used multiple accounts.

(Account information: block log · CentralAuth · suspected sockpuppets · confirmed sockpuppets · sockpuppet investigations casepage)

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User talk:2602:306:36D5:5690:0:0:0:0/64, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Atorres50 (talk) 21:57, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect category grouping templates

I noticed that you applied {{redr}} to Wikipedia:Snowball. Template:This is a redirect has been deprecated, Template:Redirect category shell should be used instead. Also, some redirect categories, such as {{R from alternative capitalization}}, should only be used in specific namespaces. Best Regards, — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 00:31, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Atorres50, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Speedy deletion nomination of Michael Hartson

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Michael Hartson, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 removed 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. Atorres50 (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of E. Lamont Johnson

The article E. Lamont Johnson has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Atorres50 (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of E. Lamont Johnson

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on E. Lamont Johnson, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be a clear copyright infringement. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 removed 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. Atorres50 (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for speedy deletion

Hi, Atorres50. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 21:07, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico pages

I appreciate that you're looking at the recent guidelines around Mexico broadcasting pages, but some do need to stay, like XHFN-TDT. XHFN had a unique history and that factors into why it's being kept.

Please let me know if you plan any additional redirections in the future. There are a few that are OK to do but others I don't want to ditch. Raymie (t • c) 23:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop CSD tagging

Hi, Atorres50. Please stop adding multiple CSD notices to pages. This is unnecessary. Additionally, I've reverted your CSD tags to articles in draft space -- these articles are there to be worked on and those submissions are reviewed, not deleted. Unless there are immediate problems such as copyright or BLP violations, they do not need to be tagged for CSD. While I appreciare your eagerness to patrol new pages, please review the rules at WP:CSD and WP:Deletion policy before tagging more pages. Thanks. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I have reverted your tagging of articles in userspace which were already correctly tagged as WP:U1. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:21, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop CSD tagging. You obviously do not understand the criterion. I have reverted a few that were obviously invalid criterion and now one that I had just declined a little before. - GB fan 18:23, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Azteca Deportes listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Azteca Deportes. Since you had some involvement with the Azteca Deportes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Atorres50 (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You need to finish the nomination of Azteca Deportes or the RFD tag will be removed. You need to follow all the directions at WP:RFD#HOWTO. - GB fan 19:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You need to finish the nomination of Samsung Galaxy J1 mini Prime also. - GB fan 20:00, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016). Since you had some involvement with the Samsung Galaxy J3 (2016) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Atorres50 (talk) 21:37, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NBC Sports Live Extra listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect NBC Sports Live Extra. Since you had some involvement with the NBC Sports Live Extra redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Atorres50 (talk) 21:59, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:00, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are you doing?

Hi, Atorres50! I noticed you have been signing other users names to edits in discussions here and here. What was the intent? Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 22:02, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting the diffs, I was in the process of posting the same thing myself. The impersonation is the main reason for the block, which is highly disruptive. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: Yeah, I was thinking gross incompetence but then this came after the block so seems to be a combination of both (impersonation and incompetence.) Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 22:10, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

sigh... I'll go ahead make it indefinite then. I completely agree, Chrissy. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal

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).

Atorres50 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Just I'm not blocked me I'm autoconfirmed user that's wrong block me user:Tavix i don't care tavix I didn't block me I'm autoconfirmed user regards possible yet Atorres50 (talk) 22:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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. —DoRD (talk) 22:17, 7 February 2017 (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.

Appeal

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).

Atorres50 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will not damage and disrupt Wikipedia I will make useful contributions I'm accepting my request but I'm autoconfirmed I'm understanding i want me to unblock accept me my request at UTRS I suggest me to don't harrass other users I will not disrupt it I'm accepted the request from Unblock Ticket Request System Atorres50 (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Incoherent unblock request. Yamla (talk) 18:06, 8 February 2017 (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.

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

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

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

—DoRD (talk) 19:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]