User talk:CMCreator900
CMCreator900 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
To whom it may concern, I would ask that you please reconsider my block system. Wikipedia is an incredibly complex system and I'm doing my best to learn it. I understand that I did wrong by making multiple accounts and will never do it again. I will only use this one moving forward and will abide by all of Wikipedia's guidelines and be sure I know them. Please I would ask that you just block me for a certain amount of time, if anything. Thank you.
UPDATE: I was told to list my accounts so here you go. These are all of them. Please let me know if you can consider unblocking me: * MisterWikiSam * MisterWikiJacob UPDATE #2: I have no affiliation with Bhaz26 and I can assure you of that. I promise these mistakes won't happen again. Thank you for considering. @Yunshui: I look forward to hearing your response. CMCreator900 (talk) 04:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am unconvinced that you are willing to edit constructively. The gist of what I read on your talk page is that your are WP:nothere. Perhaps the next admin to come along will see things differently. I will page the blocking admin. Take care and be well. @Yunshui: Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:09, 28 October 2017 (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.
- It would help if you could list all other accounts you have used. Huon (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
@Huon: Thank you for the suggestion, I just did that. Would you advise I do anything else or does it look okay? Appreciated.
CMCreator900 (talk) 04:03, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Your email
[edit]Hello there fine fella, I have read and considered the email you sent me, concluding the following:
- For the second bullet point, I'd definetly be on-board, depending on what kind of companies we would be addressing (my primary focus lies on video game companies, but the scheme easily widens to technology companies and such).
- For the first point, however, I would like to ask again what you would consider my part in that blog to be--researcher, writer, illustrator? I could imagine holding such as position very dimly, depending on how it turns out. Lordtobi (✉) 21:50, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Good to hear from you. Would you be able to email me? cmcreator900
gmail.com
It would be much easier to communicate. Thanks!
CMCreator900 (talk) 14:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
October 2017
[edit]
Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to NF (rapper), have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:58, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello Walter,
There are multiple more recent references mentioning NF under the 'hip hop' category. Here are just a few:
- https://hiphopdx.com/news/id.44788/title.hip-hop-single-sales-post-malone-21-savage-debut-at-1-with-rockstar#
- https://www.idolator.com/7668790/drop-guide-new-music-friday-banners-now-now-r5
- https://substreammagazine.com/2017/09/nf-let-you-down/
Additionally, he has made mention to himself as a 'hip hop' artist, not a 'christian hip hop' artist. This is the direction he is going. I am open to figuring out a middle ground here.
Sockpuppet investigation
[edit]
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CMCreator900, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Quinton Feldberg (talk) 18:08, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
I will do this now. Thank you.
Reply
[edit]Hello. This is in response to your email of earlier today. I'll tell you right up front that I have a hard time trusting Wikipedia users who blank rather than archive their talk pages, who initiate contact off-wiki for topics that are not clearly confidential, and who dangle unspecified "opportunities" in front of users they've never interacted with before. If you are involved in any way, shape or form with paid editing, or if you have a conflict of interest, you would do well to come clean on your user page without further delay. I haven't scrutinized your edits, but based on the content of your email alone, I suspect that you are "not here to build an encyclopedia," as the saying goes. If I'm wrong about that, may I suggest that radically change the way you're communicating with other users. RivertorchFIREWATER 18:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
I will add the paid editing template today. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
October 2017
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Yunshui 雲水 21:04, 9 October 2017 (UTC)CMCreator900 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
To whom it may concern... the 1 month block was reasonable but why have I been blocked indefinitely? The only reason I made a second account was because a few months ago I got blocked for 1 month for incorrectly uploading images but I learned my lesson, and I still wanted to be able to make edits. I am currently building a blog and am seeking out writers for the blog who have an expertise with Wikipedia. When I leave notices on talk pages, I get attacked for spamming. When I private email, it's the same thing. What do you expect me to do if I am looking to engage with others in the Wikipedia community? As I said, with the 1 month block I will learn my lesson and if there's anything I can do to expedite that, please let me know. Thank you. CMCreator900 (talk) 04:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You are not permitted to use multiple accounts in the manner you've been using them. As your unblock request hardly touches on your abuse of multiple accounts, I'm declining your unblock request. Yamla (talk) 11:17, 10 October 2017 (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.
Sockpuppet investigation
[edit]Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CMCreator900, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Quinton Feldberg (talk) 17:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
No need to email me. There's nothing more you need to do for your unblock request to be considered. I expect what's happening now is that admins are waiting for the results of the sockpuppet investigation. If there's a link found between you and Bhaz26 (talk · contribs) then obviously you'll have no possibility of being unblocked. If there's no link found, I expect someone will look into the matter further. In general, I'd say if the sockpuppet investigation is complete and nobody has responded to your request for an additional week, it's worth taking it down and substantially rewriting it, because this indicates you haven't convinced anyone. --Yamla (talk) 15:22, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
@Yamla:
Thanks for getting back and thanks for the tips. I updated my post if you could pass it along to the other admins and let them know or I guess I will just wait for them. Appreciated.
CMCreator900 (talk) 15:30, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
- Yamla is right, I've looked at this a couple of times but would like to see the SPI closed before making a decision. I'd also like to ask whether this is an accurate copy of an email you sent and, if so, I'd like some clarification around your "opportunities for paid editing." GoldenRing (talk) 11:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The article Beat (Ricky Dillon song) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:NSONG, as tagged since January 2016.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Trippie Redd (December 6)
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Trippie Redd and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello! CMCreator900,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 05:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Trippie Redd discography (December 6)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Trippie Redd discography and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Jason Ryan Boyarski (December 14)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jason Ryan Boyarski and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Jason Ryan Boyarski, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Nomination of Lowly Palace for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lowly Palace is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lowly Palace until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Official Lowly Palace logo.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Official Lowly Palace logo.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) 18:56, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Trap Nation for deletion
[edit]A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trap Nation is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trap Nation until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Trippie Redd
[edit]
Hello, CMCreator900. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Trippie Redd".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hhkohh (talk) 15:49, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
The article Skate (rapper) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Appears to only be notable for a single event. Didn't find reliable coverage of anything else in his career.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 13:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)