User talk:Bhaq786

Welcome!

Hello, Bhaq786, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions have removed content without an explanation. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can place {{helpme}} on your talk page along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorial
Article wizard for creating new articles
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Bobherry Talk Edits 22:05, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bhaq786, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Bhaq786! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:08, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of User:GoogleCaseBot/sandbox/archived cases/1007219

Please do not introduce inappropriate pages, such as User:GoogleCaseBot/sandbox/archived cases/1007219, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. N.J.A. | talk 12:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I'm Smjg. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Catherine Tyler. Please do not do this. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Smjg (talk) 23:10, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Bobherry Talk Edits 16:17, 15 February 2020 (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.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock appeal 1

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).

Bhaq786 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to be unblocked because I do not think that I should be blocked from editing. I have already started to make useful edits and I am not the kind of person who you have seen me as before. I feel that this block is no longer required as I have learnt my lesson and it would be a shame if I was permanently blocked from Wikipedia because I enjoy contributing by using your sandbox. Bhaq786 (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time as this is a sockpuppetry and/or checkuser block. Check users have access to technical and personally identifying information they may not disclose openly on Wikipedia. "Check user blocks must not be reversed by non-checkusers." Please read and heed the relevant sections of the WP:GAB. If this is not your original account, you will need to appeal at your original account. -- Deep fried okra 18:27, 17 February 2020 (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.

Please do not remove declined unblock requests. They must stay on your talk page. If you want to make a new request, you can do that, but you need to place a new unblock request on your talk page without blanking the previous one. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock appeal 2

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).

Bhaq786 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to be unblocked because I do not think that I should be blocked from editing. I have already started to make useful edits and I am not the kind of person who you have seen me as before. I feel that this block is no longer required as I have learnt my lesson and it would be a shame if I was permanently blocked from Wikipedia because I enjoy contributing by using your sandbox. I believe that there has been a misunderstanding. Bhaq786 (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not meaningfully different than your previous, declined, unblock request. Yamla (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2020 (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.

You are not permitted to remove or edit declined unblock requests for your currently active block. Read WP:GAB. Craft a new unblock request that is significantly better than your previous two unblock requests. Otherwise, we'll just revoke your talk page access to prevent you wasting any more of our time. --Yamla (talk) 21:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock appeal 3

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).

Bhaq786 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I should be unblocked from editing because I believe that I have been blocked wrongfully. I support this as I have learnt my lesson from being blocked previously and I deserve a second chance because I have changed my editing habits since then. I am absolutely sorry if I have caused too much damage on Wikipedia. It would be a shame to remain blocked as I really enjoy editing on Wikipedia. I would have intensions in the future (after I get unblocked) to edit articles in a sensible way and format. Bhaq786 (talk) 21:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address the reasons for the block. You are now left with UTRS to make further appeals, but they will need to be radically different than the ones here or you will lose access to that avenue of appeal as well. 331dot (talk) 22:49, 17 February 2020 (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.

As you are obviously just deliberately wasting our time, I have revoked your talk page access. If your current unblock request is declined, that leaves you with WP:UTRS. I strongly suggest taking a completely different approach there. --Yamla (talk) 22:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]