User talk:Chepe Limon
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent edits do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. 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 contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message 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.
I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! 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! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Comment - I'm a little suspicious of this, but I don't spend that much time on image uploading, and I'd like someone who does to opine on this. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Chepe Limon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I believe you have just banned me by mistake. I am not a vandal; I actually was trying to upload images on commons but it seems that many policies has changed since I last used wiki (over a year ago). The images I upload belong to other people; but I personally ask each and every one of them permission to use them. I ask on the comments section so any admin can see that the images are legit. This is my Flickr account (so you can see I am not a vandal): http://www.flickr.com/photos/50846966@N08/favorites/ For example, look at this image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/edurickes/4908072213/in/faves-50846966@N08/ I have asked the author for permission to upload his images (not just that one), with the condition that they are cited and sourced (giving him the credit). He has agreed (via personal email) and I have just notified to mention it on the comments section so everyone can see. Since they are not technically "free" commons wouldn't allow it to stay. But on normal wiki it is well withing the policies. Most of the images on "My favorites" is the same thing, with many already giving me permission to upload them to use on wiki articles (I will be expanding South American football articles). Now, can you unblock me, please? Only reason I did the 11 BS edits was to see if I can upload them now (seeing your new autoconfirm policy). Thanks! (I am Chepe BTW) 68.215.155.90 (talk) 12:14 pm, Today (UTC−5)
Decline reason:
It appears that you were attempting to do null edits in order to defeat autoconfirmation in order to upload "permission for Wikipedia only" images, which is not a free license. None of those things are acceptable. Autoconfirmation is intended to confirm that you are able to perform real edits. Null edits to articles clog up the edit history to no purpose. "Permission for use on Wikipedia" is a nonfree license, so we do not accept such images—we require the same free licenses as Commons does. You have not given any indication that you understand why you were blocked or will correct the behavior. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:03, 29 August 2010 (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.
- Drive-by comment The minimum number of edits to become auto-confirmed is a method of verifying that the editor actually intends to be a positive editor on Wikipedia. Making nul edits bypasses that test of trust - we still have zero proof of your intentions on Wikipedia, and thus it is impossible to know your motives. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Simple: just to edit South American football articles and upload legit images. There is no hidden agenda.Chepe Limon (talk) 17:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- But how do we know? You cheated to get there ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't cheat. Did I break any rules?
- How would you know? Cheat? Did I break any rules? If so, mention them. I already told you I wasn't here for vandalism. I am not sure what else you want to hear from me but this "guilty verdict before committing a crime", with no evidence on top of it, is nothing short of ridiculous and says a lot about the treatment new users might get. Edits are edits, whether they are a paragraph or a letter. You are threading into the dangerous territory of discriminately banning users just on your hunches. Chepe Limon (talk) 19:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- I looked at your "edits" ... they were not edits. The goal is to determine in your first 10 edits your overall plans as an editor: you made nul edits, which means you cheated to become autoconfirmed. Editors have been blocked for less, and indeed there is a long-term banned editor whose socks do the same thing, and they're instantly blocked when they do - I'm not yet saying that this is the case right now. Note: WP:BAN and WP:BLOCK are not the same thing. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- How about assuming your "so-called" good faith? Call it how you want it but edits are edits; the most you can judge edits by is if they were disruptive/vandalism (which they weren't). And if editors have been banned for less, then I seriously question the quality of your admin. That is probably why there are rules and guidlines like, "guilty until proven innocent", "assume good faith", blah blah blah (which, by the looks of it, is pure BS). I don't have time to deal with this BS anymore. Bye.
- "Assume good faith" merely means "presume good faith unless there is sufficient evidence to indicate otherwise". In this case your edits give more than enough evidence to indicate otherwise. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:52, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- How about assuming your "so-called" good faith? Call it how you want it but edits are edits; the most you can judge edits by is if they were disruptive/vandalism (which they weren't). And if editors have been banned for less, then I seriously question the quality of your admin. That is probably why there are rules and guidlines like, "guilty until proven innocent", "assume good faith", blah blah blah (which, by the looks of it, is pure BS). I don't have time to deal with this BS anymore. Bye.
- I looked at your "edits" ... they were not edits. The goal is to determine in your first 10 edits your overall plans as an editor: you made nul edits, which means you cheated to become autoconfirmed. Editors have been blocked for less, and indeed there is a long-term banned editor whose socks do the same thing, and they're instantly blocked when they do - I'm not yet saying that this is the case right now. Note: WP:BAN and WP:BLOCK are not the same thing. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- How would you know? Cheat? Did I break any rules? If so, mention them. I already told you I wasn't here for vandalism. I am not sure what else you want to hear from me but this "guilty verdict before committing a crime", with no evidence on top of it, is nothing short of ridiculous and says a lot about the treatment new users might get. Edits are edits, whether they are a paragraph or a letter. You are threading into the dangerous territory of discriminately banning users just on your hunches. Chepe Limon (talk) 19:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't cheat. Did I break any rules?
- But how do we know? You cheated to get there ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Simple: just to edit South American football articles and upload legit images. There is no hidden agenda.Chepe Limon (talk) 17:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC)