User talk:DanceStation

Welcome!

Hello, DanceStation, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Tamara Tchinarova, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

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 New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, 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! Lakokat (Drop me a line) 13:26, 13 February 2012 (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).

DanceStation (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 am a new user to Wikipedia and have only joined recently. I have not made any previous edits to Wikipedia, so I am not sure why I have been blocked. I am based in an office with internet IP shared by more than 40+ people, so I am not sure if this could be the cause. Please review and feel free to ask me any further questions --DanceStation (talk) 11:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I would love to believe you. However, new editors - even ones from the same office as disruptive ones - do not typically return to the exact same articles that the disruptive editor caused a huge degree of problems on. They also typically do not fight over the same stupid stuff. As such, you're either evading a valid block, making edits on behalf of that disruptive person, or exactly the type of disruptive editor that Wikipedia does not have the patience for (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:36, 20 February 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).

DanceStation (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 request to have my history and contributions reviewed, not at any point have I been involved in any fights or been disruptive. If the reference is to my last change on the disputed article, I have discussed the issue in the Talk page first and only after two weeks made the change. From the article history it seems that only one user doest agree with the originally created article and caused an edit war (previously blocked, now unblocked user Gazifikator). There seems to be a consensus otherwise. I have been researching the subject of dance for 10 years now and have given some very good research materials in my contributions to Wikipedia. Thank you for your consideration. --DanceStation (talk) 11:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Having reviewed this account's contributions, I'm certain that it's not your first on Wikipedia. Max Semenik (talk) 12:14, 20 February 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).

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

Request reason:

Giving it a last shot. My first request was denied because I was apparently disruptive, it turned that I am not. Second decline has been because its not my first time on Wikipedia, that is correct, I have been on it actively for few weeks now, but I don't see why that should be a reason to be blocked. I understand that Wikipedia is an open encyclopaedia, so one has to be careful, but I believe its more important to have good quality and validated data - if you review my history, I have contributed some well referenced, new, reliable data and was involved in any disruptive activity. Hope for your consideration. --DanceStation (talk) 12:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We don't unblock socks, you should request an unblock from your original account. Max Semenik (talk) 13:02, 20 February 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).

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

Request reason:

I am rather disappointed by rudeness of some Wiki staff. By adding new sources, references and wording to an article agreed on by the consensus, I get blocked; by raising the issue here, my explanation gets ignored and I only get sarcastic comments in return. I understand you must be dealing with multiple issues and its hard to spend too much time on each query, but enough time should be allocated so that Wikipedia has quality information, which is trusted. Again, please have a look at the changes made and my activity history: quality, well referenced info, new articles, consensus info, no disruptive editing. If any of the latter if incorrect, please indicate so.--DanceStation (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No grounds for unblock provided. You'll need to request unblock from your original account. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 16:58, 20 February 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).

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

Request reason:

Grounds for unlock provided in the first request - this account is my first and only account, and I made sure I am logged in as DanceStation when making comments. Please let me know more information from your side to help resolve the issue. I am sure you are able to see that the IP is shared by not just few by tens of users. Please let me know if it will be useful that I log in from my home IP. Please suggest what can be done to resolve the situation, as there is clearly some confusion.--DanceStation (talk) 18:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I've looked back over your history and the history of some of your alleged socks, and I find different accounts reinstating *exactly the same text* as each other. And these are accounts that have been linked by IP address evidence etc. The probability of that being mere coincidence with people who just happen to work in the same building, as you suggest, is so low that I'm afraid I simply cannot believe you. Your only chance is to come clean and request unblock at the first account that you used. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:09, 20 February 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.