User talk:DAWikipedia

Welcome

Hello, DAWikipedia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you will enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! You can sign your name on talk and voting pages using four tildes, (~~~~), which produces your username, the time, and the date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. While the Wikipedia community appreciates your obvious efforts to increase the amount of information on the site, we'd like to point out our policy against original research and for citing sources for the information you provide. This increases the reputation of Wikipedia as a whole and aids in checking the factuality of that article. — getcrunk what?! 12:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My concern about your username

Hello, DAWikipedia, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as asking for a "third opinion", or requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Let me reassure you that my writing here means I don't think your username is grossly, blatantly, or obviously inappropriate; such names get reported straight to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention or blocked on sight. This is more a case where opinions might differ, and it would be good to reach some consensus — either here or at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names. So I look forward to a friendly discussion, and to enjoying your continued participation on Wikipedia. Thank you. Xtreme racer 17:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All That

I have changed a few times the quote for the Loud Librarian to reflect her true pronunciation, "liberry [sic]" for "library". This is not a typographic error on my part, but an ironic error on her part, the source of the best humour of the piece. So I will continue to revert this edit. Thanks, --Alwpoe (talk) 04:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced information

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Phil McGraw‎. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 00:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Phil McGraw‎. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 00:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Charles S. Rushe Middle School

I have nominated Charles S. Rushe Middle School, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles S. Rushe Middle School. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Tpk5010 (talk) 18:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Anclote High School

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Supertouch (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Nancy Pelosi, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Loonymonkey (talk) 21:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The last six edits made under this account has been vandalism and/or BLP violations. Because this account has been semi-active in the past year, it appears it has now been compromised, and thus I'm blocking it as a security precaution. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:59, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

173.78.83.128 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "DAWikipedia". The reason given for DAWikipedia's block is: "Vandalism: The last six edits made under this account has been vandalism an

Blocking administrator: Zzyzx11 (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: Not an autoblock issue. Please request unblocking using the normal unblocking template. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:37, 26 November 2011 (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).

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

Request reason:

WTF

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. Kuru (talk) 01:43, 26 November 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

The block is no longer necessary because I understand what I was blocked for, I will not do it again, and I will make productive contributions instead

Decline reason:

"Must convince" entails more than simply repeating the criteria. Any further inadequate requests will likely result in this page being locked. Kuru (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2012 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will no longer engage in activities that caused me to be blocked in the first place. Please unblock asap.

Decline reason:

I don't mean to be unkind, but single sentence and vague unblock requests aren't at all convincing. If you choose to ask to be unblocked again, please explain what you would like to work on (including the references you'll use) and how you will avoid the problems which led to this block. Nick-D (talk) 06:29, 8 January 2012 (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.

Nomination of Hot Jamz for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hot Jamz 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/Hot Jamz 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 until the discussion has finished.

Let'srun (talk) 17:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]